Bruce Fanjoy

Mr. Speaker, today I rise to share good news. The fifth annual Welcome to Stittsville Multicultural Festival is taking place this Saturday, June 20, at Village Square Park in beautiful Stittsville. The festival brings together residents from all over the region to celebrate diversity through cultural performances, food, music and local organizations. It showcases people and cultures that make our community a wonderful place to live, grow and thrive. I especially thank all the volunteers whose dedication over the years and hard work have made the Welcome to Stittsville Multicultural Festival possible each year. I encourage everyone to bring family and friends to enjoy all the festival has to offer. It brings out the best of us, it shows the best of us and it is something we can all be proud of.

Mr. Speaker, the Victoria Cross is the highest military honour Canada awards for acts of extraordinary valour. It was created in 1993, yet has never been awarded. Constituents in my riding are calling for an independent review of military decorations from the Afghanistan mission. The time for action is now. Can the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence inform this House how the government is committed to a fair and transparent process to honour the valour of our veterans?

Mr. Speaker, building Canada strong for all creates an extraordinary opportunity in the trades. Can the hon. member please inform the House of the opportunities that exist for young people in the trades?

Mr. Speaker, life changes in a moment. Sometimes that moment means the difference between life and death. Auston Pierce, a beloved son, brother, partner, friend and member of this parliamentary community, suffered a life-threatening injury last Friday. Auston is healing today, thanks to the swift and heroic action of an off-duty Ottawa firefighter, Jason Murray. I encourage all Canadians to learn first aid, because one day, they may be the person in the right place at the right time to save someone's life as Jason did. On behalf of the House, I express our profound gratitude to Jason for being there for Auston in those critical first moments. I am also thankful to all first responders and health care professionals. To Auston, I say Godspeed, dear friend.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today for the third reading of Bill C-225, Bailey's law, an important step forward in Canada's response to intimate partner violence. Before I go further, I would like to acknowledge once again that the bill has been titled “Bailey's law” in honour of Bailey McCourt, a woman from Kelowna, B.C., who was tragically killed by her estranged intimate partner in July of last year. Members of Bailey McCourt's family were present at committee, and their advocacy inspired multiple parts of this bill. It is important that we say survivors' names, and it is important for them, as well as for countless other survivors and families of those who have suffered intimate partner violence, that we continue our efforts to advance this most important work. At its core, the bill responds to a reality that is far too present in communities across this country. Intimate partner violence remains one of the most pervasive and dangerous forms of violence in Canada, and in too many cases, it escalates to lethal outcomes. This is not an abstract policy issue but a lived reality for survivors, families and frontline service providers who see the consequences every day. That is why this legislation matters. What makes Bill C-225 particularly significant is not only its substance but the way it was developed. This is a bill that benefited from serious, sustained and good-faith collaboration between the sponsor of the bill, the member for Kamloops—Thompson—Nicola; the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada; the Minister of Women and Gender Equality; and members across the Standing Committee on the Status of Women. Through that work, the bill was refined in a meaningful way. A total of 18 government amendments and three opposition amendments were adopted at committee stage, reflecting a process that was focused less on partisan positioning and more on ensuring that the legislation is effective, constitutionally sound and responsive to the realities of intimate partner violence. That collaborative approach is something we should take seriously. It demonstrates that when Parliament works constructively, we can improve legislation in a way that better protects victims while maintaining fairness and coherence in criminal law. As amended, Bill C-225 would advance four key pillars. First, it would clarify how the criminal law treats intimate partner homicide in situations involving coercive and controlling conduct. By linking the most serious homicide classification to patterns of coercive control, the bill would ensure that the law better reflects the reality of sustained abuse while also guarding against unintended consequences for survivors who may have acted in response to prolonged violence. Second, it would create a single, comprehensive intimate partner violence offence. Rather than relying on a fragmented set of offences, this approach recognizes the full spectrum of violent conduct that can occur in an intimate relationship, from threats and assault to more serious forms of violence. The bill would also support consistency in charging and clear recognition of patterns of abuse. Third, it would modernize the treatment of seized property under section 490 of the Criminal Code by extending the initial detention period to 180 days. This adjustment reflects a balance between individual rights and the need for an effective and efficient justice system. Fourth, it would strengthen the bail framework by introducing a targeted reverse onus for certain repeat or high-risk intimate partner violence situations, particularly when there is a demonstrated history of prior violence or breach of court-ordered conditions. This would ensure that the courts have the tools necessary to appropriately assess risk while maintaining judicial discretion and charter compliance. Taken together, these amendments reflect a careful balancing exercise, strengthening protections for victims while ensuring the framework remains fair, proportionate and constitutionally sound. Importantly, Bill C-225 does not exist in isolation. It is part of a broader set of reforms that this Parliament has been advancing to address violence, coercive control and systemic gaps in the criminal justice response. For example, Bill C-16, the protecting victims act, takes a broader approach to coercive control, femicide and emerging forms of technology-facilitated violence, including deepfake sexual imagery and sextortion. It reflects a recognition that patterns of abuse are evolving and that the law must evolve with them. Similarly, Bill C-14, the bail and sentencing reform act, would strengthen the response to repeat violent offending, particularly in cases involving sexual violence and serious harm. It would reinforce the principle that bail decisions must reflect public safety and victim protection. When viewed together, these measures form a more coherent and modern framework for addressing intimate partner violence and gender-based violence more broadly. What Bill C-225 demonstrates is that progress is possible when we approach these issues seriously and collaboratively. It is encouraging that despite political differences, members were able to come together in committee to improve this legislation and move it forward in a way that reflects both accountability and fairness. At the same time, we must be clear that no single bill will solve intimate partner violence on its own. Legislative reform is one part of a broader response that must also include prevention, early intervention, housing supports, mental health services and resources for frontline organizations. However, legislation does matter. It sets the tone for how the justice system understands and responds to violence. It signals to survivors that their experiences are recognized. It ensures that offenders are held accountable in a way that reflects the seriousness of the harm caused. That is what Bill C-225 would do. It would strengthen the criminal law's ability to respond to intimate partner violence. It would improve coherence in how offences are prosecuted. It would enhance protection for victims. It would do so in a way that reflects careful committee work and cross-party engagement, so today I want to acknowledge the constructive role played by the sponsor of the bill, and the willingness of members from all parties to engage seriously with amendments that improve the legislation. That kind of work is not always easy in the House, but it is essential. As we move forward, I would encourage all members to continue in that same spirit of collaboration as we consider related reforms, including Bill C-16, which is now before the justice committee and which we hope will be passed as soon as possible, and Bill C-14, which is now in committee study at the Senate and which we hope senators will help advance swiftly. Together, these reforms represent a broader effort to modernize Canada's criminal justice response to violence and exploitation. Ultimately, the objective is not partisan. It is about safety, prevention and ensuring that when violence occurs in the most intimate of relationships, the justice system is equipped to respond effectively and fairly. For those reasons, I am proud to support Bill C-225 at third reading, and I encourage all members of the House to do the same.

Mr. Speaker, Build Canada Homes is Canada's affordable housing builder, and it is already delivering real results. It is working with partners to accelerate the construction of affordable homes across Canada, including right here in Ottawa. In just a few short months, we are already seeing progress, with the fast-tracking of eight shovel-ready projects in growing neighbourhoods. Can the Minister of Housing and Infrastructure please update the House on the momentum that the partnership between Build Canada Homes and the City of Ottawa is delivering?

Mr. Speaker, 42,397 people signed a petition calling on all federal party leaders to seek and maintain top security clearance. With it, leaders can be informed and prepared. Marc Hachey of Carleton is a retired senior RCMP officer who initiated the petition. Throughout his distinguished career, he worked on national security investigations, so he understands the risks we face. The Leader of the Opposition has refused to seek top security clearance. He believes the less he knows about national security, the more effective he can be. Wilful ignorance does not make a leader; trust and intelligence do. This issue is not going away. All federal party leaders, without exception, have an important role to play in national security, and that requires intelligence.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to present a petition on behalf of over 42,000 Canadians, representing every part of this country, east, west, north and south. It is calling on all leaders of federal parties to seek and maintain top security clearance for the protection of our country. This petition was initiated by a retired high-ranking RCMP officer who spent much of his career doing national security investigations. I am honoured to present this petition on behalf of him and 42,000 Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, it is my honour to rise today to speak to Bill C-25, the strong and free elections act. The strong and free elections act proposes targeted priority amendments to the Canada Elections Act that would further protect and secure Canada's elections by mitigating unduly long ballots, foreign interference and deepfakes; protecting nomination and leadership contests; closing channels for foreign funding; bolstering personal security measures; and strengthening federal political party privacy requirements. It gives me great pleasure to speak today about how these changes, as outlined in Bill C-25, would protect our democracy and support Canadians. First, I would like to address the issue of long ballot protest tactics. In my riding of Carleton, we experienced an extraordinarily high number of candidates registered, not seriously to contest the election but to disrupt the process. These tactics create confusion for voters, lengthen ballots, slow down the voting process, place unnecessary strain on election workers and are not cost-free. Ultimately, they make our elections more costly. During the 2025 federal election, the longest ballot committee in my riding of Carleton contributed 85 of the 91 candidates on the ballot. The ballot was so long that adjustments had to be made to voting procedures and vote counting in Carleton. The ballot itself was nearly 97 centimetres long, with two columns of names. Due to the longest ballot committee protest, constituents in Carleton faced unnecessary strain from the ballots, a significant financial burden was put on our local election systems, and election workers dealt with added pressure. However, in the face of the longest ballot committee and its disruptive tactics, I am proud to state that in Carleton there was a staggering turnout of nearly 82% during the last election. That is testimony to the determination of voters in Carleton to vote, often waiting well over an hour. Personally, I waited an hour and a half to cast my ballot. While constituents in Carleton experienced the long ballot, it is also being exercised in other ridings, notably this past week in Terrebonne. It is hindering elections wherever it is taking place. Elections should be accessible and an engaging process for Canadians to take part in. They should not become an ordeal that discourages people from going to the polls or volunteering to serve in our democracy. That is why Bill C-25 would take concrete steps to address this issue. Bill C-25 would prevent official agents from serving more than one candidate at the same time, which is a tactic that has been used to organize and sustain longest ballot committee campaigns. Currently, candidates must collect 100 signatures from electors in the riding to be nominated. However, there are no limits on how many candidates an elector can sign for. This has allowed coordinated efforts to artificially inflate the number of candidates. Bill C-25 would change this and only allow electors to sign one nomination form. Those who attempt to sign multiple forms as part of a coordinated effort to manipulate the ballot could face penalties. These changes are practical, targeted and necessary. They would ensure that the nomination process reflects genuine democratic participation, not coordinated efforts to overwhelm the system. Our elections must remain accessible, but they must also remain fair and functional. Bill C-25 would help strike that balance by protecting the integrity of the ballot and ensuring that voters determine the outcome of our elections. Bill C-25 would also allow us to detect and protect elections from foreign interference, disinformation and other potential threats to our democracy. Bill C-25 would further strengthen and secure Canada's federal elections by ensuring electors are protected at all times against unlawful attempts to influence their vote, not only when elections are called. The bill would also ban sophisticated deepfakes of candidates intended to mislead voters. It would also be against the law to tamper or interfere with computer systems to disrupt an election. All proposed and existing electoral crimes would be deemed illegal, whether or not they take place inside or outside Canada. To combat foreign interference, Bill C-25 would give the commissioner the authority to reach out to other countries, through information-sharing agreements, to investigate suspected instances of foreign electoral interference. Also, the bill would add new privacy policy requirements for all federal political parties and new disclosure requirements in the event of a data breach. This is important because democracy depends on trust in fair and secure elections. If voters believe elections can be influenced by foreign interference or disinformation at home or abroad, it weakens confidence in the system. These measures would ensure that Canadians can make informed decisions based on accurate information. Ultimately, the bill would strengthen the integrity of our elections and ensure that outcomes reflect the informed will of the people. The bill would close potential channels of foreign funding in the electoral process. This would protect nomination and leadership contests from threats, bribery and intimidation. To prevent foreign money from entering our system, Bill C-25 would prevent political parties from accepting anonymous or untraceable contributions from cryptocurrency, prepaid gift cards and money orders for all their activities. This ban would extend the current ban on third parties using foreign funds for partisan activities during nomination contests and general elections to include leadership contests. Bill C-25 would increase the fines that Elections Canada can impose on individuals and parties for violating the Canada Elections Act. The maximum penalty for an individual who breaks the law would rise from $1,500 to $25,000, while an organization's maximum fine would increase from $5,000 to $100,000. Outside the people or parties that are fined, anyone proven to have conspired with them or advised them could also be held accountable. Today I have highlighted the importance of the strong and free elections act, as it would increase the integrity of Canadian democratic processes to ensure that our elections are fair and strong. As elections around the world are being subjected to new and evolving threats, the strong and free elections act would ensure that Canada's election laws continue to be properly enforced. Canada's democracy and electoral system are among the strongest and most stable in the world. The proposed changes under Bill C-25 would serve to further enforce Canada's already strong democracy. Stronger investigative powers for the commissioner of Canada elections would enable more thorough investigations, fairer outcomes and greater accountability, which would reduce the burden on courts. Bill C-25 is about strengthening our democracy, ensuring the fairness of our elections and holding bad actors accountable. The bill would send a strong message. Canada is a resilient democracy. No bad actor, at home or abroad, will be allowed to interfere in our elections. Instead, Bill C-25 would uphold what this Parliament stands for: strong, free and fair elections decided by Canadians and for Canadians. We are the true north, strong and free. That strength and freedom need to always be reflected in our elections and they will always be defended by our government. That is exactly what the strong and free elections act would achieve.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for that very good-faith question. The Prime Minister has made it clear in the budget that we need to spend less on operations in order to invest more. The vast majority of changes in the public service will be through voluntary retirement and attrition. The member knows that very well. She also knows very well that the Leader of the Opposition, the current member for Battle River—Crowfoot, would have made much deeper cuts. I hear frequently from commentators that we are not going far enough. I have consistently stood for the public service. I continue to do so and people can depend on that from the member for Carleton.

Mr. Speaker, we encourage all good-faith candidates to step forward and participate in our democracy. I think it is also very important that all members take every opportunity to improve civic literacy in this country. I would always support a good-faith candidate running, whether they are running for an official party or as an independent. However, there are loopholes that have allowed a long ballot to overwhelm our elections process. For the health of our democracy, we need to close those.

Mr. Speaker, I think that getting democracy right, as with so many other things we deal with in this House, is about striking the right balance. While we protect the rights of candidates to run, we also must protect the rights of voters to vote. I do not have a specific example for the long ballot, but I know that people who have vision disabilities or other disabilities have more difficulty dealing with such a monumentally big ballot. It is not reasonable to expect people to stand in line for multiple hours simply because we have made a process too burdensome. I am confident that Bill C-25 would strike the right balance. We can explore it further in committee—

Mr. Speaker, I was pleased to hear your commitment to dealing with foreign interference and maintaining our national security. I would like to hear an explanation as to why the leader of the official opposition refuses to seek top security clearance so he can be briefed on these matters that you care so much about.

Mr. Speaker, at a time when some people mistakenly frame the environment and the economy as competing priorities, our government is taking a different approach. Can the Minister of the Environment, Climate Change and Nature share with the House how Canada's new nature strategy is both protecting our natural capital and building a stronger, more sustainable economy?

Mr. Speaker, I rise to honour the remarkable life of William Herbert Loewen, an entrepreneur and patron of the arts. Bill passed away in Winnipeg on February 4 at the age of 95. He was predeceased by his equally remarkable wife, Shirley, and is survived by their children, Ann, Howard, Louise, Peter and Jennifer, as well as many loved ones. From modest prairie roots, Bill founded Comcheq Services Limited and built it into Canada’s largest independent payroll service provider. Bill believed deeply in the power of the arts to enrich our spirits. He was a member of the Order of Canada and an honorary member of the Winnipeg Symphony Orchestra, the only person ever to receive that distinction. Bill had a profound impact on many lives, including mine when he hired me at the age of 23. Canada is better because of Bill's leadership in business, his love of country, his passion for the arts and the tremendous example of his life.

Mr. Speaker, at the HUMA committee earlier this week, members of the Breakfast Club of Canada and the Coalition for Healthy School Food talked about the real impact of the national school food program on kids and families. When a motion was brought forward to study those impacts, Conservative and Bloc members chose to adjourn debate before it even began. Can the parliamentary secretary for children and youth remind the House of how this program is supporting children and helping families with affordability, and why it matters that we continue to move this work forward?