Dane Lloyd

Mr. Speaker, under the Liberal government, Canada has seen an explosion in crime. The Liberals' soft-on crime policies have allowed hardened, violent criminals out on bail and house arrest. I encounter off-duty RCMP officers who tell me it is so bad that the drug dealers they arrest are back out on the street in mere hours. One such case in my community cost the life of a young girl, when a dangerous criminal on house arrest kidnapped and drowned her. Conservatives want to repeal Liberal bail policies and house arrest for violent criminals and to lock up violent repeat offenders. We want to bring in mandatory prison time for extortionists, human traffickers and fentanyl dealers. We want to end lenient sentencing discounts for violent non-citizens that are designed to prevent them from being deported. It is time for the Liberals to get on board and reject their 10 years of failed soft-on-crime Liberal policies that have unleashed chaos on our streets. Conservatives will always stand up for the rights of victims and law-abiding Canadians. It is time for the Liberals to do the same.

Mr. Speaker, as Remembrance Day approaches, military chaplains representing many faiths are deeply concerned about government instructions issued over the summer directing them not to reference God in prayer or spiritual reflections. This instruction defies a unanimous motion passed by the House in November 2024 that affirmed the rights of chaplains not to be restricted or punished for referencing God in prayer or reflections. I have raised this issue with the Minister of National Defence. Will he explain why this instruction was issued over the summer and confirm that chaplains will face no consequences for carrying out their sacred duties?

Mr. Speaker, Conservatives will take no lessons from these Liberals on tough-on-crime policies. After 10 years of these Liberals, violent crime in this country has gone up 55%. What did the Liberal government do? It brought bail, not jail for repeat violent offenders. It gutted mandatory minimums. Canadians want to give law enforcement officers the tools they need to catch the bad guys and put them behind bars. What they do not want to see is government overreach, adding surveillance on law-abiding Canadians. Conservatives support getting part 1 of Bill C-22 passed swiftly, but we need changes to protect Canadians' privacy. Instead of listening, these Liberals are forcing this through with no further scrutiny—

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to join this very important debate today. I am a member of the public safety committee, and I have been there throughout this process. We have seen in this Parliament the failure of the government, when it brought forward Bill C-2, and the ongoing failure of the government to get legislation moved forward, with Bill C-22. I want to say at the outset that I will be splitting my time with the member for Thornhill. I want to make it clear that we see there is a need for changes to be made to assist law enforcement in this digital age. I saw, a number of years ago, in the wake of a 5-4 decision of the Supreme Court on Bykovets revolving around the idea of the reasonable expectation of privacy in the case of a credit card fraud case, that the methods being used by law enforcement to investigate these crimes, and many other crimes that take place digitally, had been severely curtailed. I worked with my local RCMP integrated childhood exploitation unit and other stakeholders. I think a good solution is contained in what is considered part 1 of Bill C-22. That is not to say that Conservatives and I do not have issues with part 1. There are issues. There are questions about the thresholds, be it a reason to suspect or a reason to believe. One of the thresholds, the one that was chosen by the government, is far lower, but essentially, I believe, as Conservatives, we can support part 1, because we know that, if law enforcement has to reach out to a telecommunications company or an electronic service provider, they do not know whether that provider actually provides a service to an IP address, a name or a phone number, and they have to write a warrant for that process. That is a very time-consuming process for law enforcement. It is like searching for a needle in a haystack. It is very difficult. As such, part 1 of the legislation seeks to create a subscriber confirmation, and I think that this could be an effective way to have something that does not require a warrant and to ask electronic service providers and telecommunications companies a simple yes-or-no question: Do they provide services to an IP address, or do they provide services to a number? I think that this could really cut down on the bureaucratic red tape that law enforcement faces. It could help speed up investigations. That is why, as Conservatives, despite some of the concerns that experts have raised, like civil liberty groups and Canadian Bar Association, we can work with that However, where we really get into the weeds is with the concerns we set out on part 2 of the legislation. Before I get into the concerns on part 2, as they are very technical in nature, but very important, I want to provide a bit of an overview of what happened at committee. This is very far-reaching legislation. It proposes to radically remake the entire paradigm of investigations in Canada. While I recognize that there need to be reforms, when we are dealing with something of this magnitude, that is not something that can be rushed. This is not necessarily because members just want to be oppositional for the sake of opposition. However, it is actually in the government's, and all of Canada's, best interests that parliamentarians really scrutinize the legislation, because we know that the legislation is going to be contested in the courts in the future, and we want to make sure that we have the best legislation so that it is actually effective at doing the job. What Canadians fear is that the government could potentially misuse it, and maybe not even the government but malicious actors and criminal actors could misuse the vulnerabilities that the government would be creating through the legislation. At committee we heard from many witnesses, but the amount of time that we had to hear from witnesses was extremely truncated. It was over a short matter of weeks in two-hour meetings, where we had panels of very intelligent experts who had a lot to say about the legislation. Every day I was getting emails from the public safety committee clerk with new submissions and briefs. We simply did not have the appropriate time to really dissect the legislation and go deep down into the far-reaching, potentially negative impacts of it so the process became very rushed. It was a real sea change because, prior to the government's manufactured majority, it actually had to work with other parties in order to get legislation passed. The cybersecurity legislation came forward, and there were some really strong amendments put forward by opposition parties in this House that were adopted. I think it really made the legislation stronger. However, ever since the government received its manufactured majority, it has not been interested in working with other parties. Now we see that it is using this programming motion to try to ram through the legislation so that we cannot scrutinize it further. I respect the members of our non-partisan public service. At the committee clause-by-clause stage they came as technical witnesses to speak about aspects of the bill. However, during the back-and-forth, it became very clear, and they said as much, that this was important legislation to them as members of the public service, and that they were invested in getting this legislation passed. Many of the amendments that we as Conservatives and other parties put forward were based on the recommendations of the Privacy Commissioner, who is a constitutional lawyer. He is a very intelligent man who I think put forward some very reasonable amendments. We as Conservatives and the Bloc Québécois wanted to have him sit in on the meeting so he could provide his insight on the more technical nature of some of the amendments and the issues we were talking about. The government would not allow that to happen. I think that is where this process really broke down and where it was shown that the government was not acting in good faith and not willing to work with opposition parties. The Privacy Commissioner is not partisan. He is an expert in his field. He is appointed by Parliament. Bringing him forward to committee to help us explore the very real privacy implications of this legislation I think would have done a great deal in easing its passage. It is a gargantuan bill with a number of amendments. It would have taken the committee a great deal of time to get through it, but I think the fact the government was not willing to hear from the Privacy Commissioner showed that it was not really interested in having a serious discussion on it. I want to get into some other aspects of part 2 now. I am very concerned about these metadata provisions. Metadata, for those listening, is the stuff in our phones. It is not necessarily the content of the text messages or the browsing history, but it is very important information about our location, what phone numbers we are contacting and other such things. The government is putting forward a proposal that would require telecommunications and other companies to maintain this metadata for up to a year. It has been ruled unconstitutional in the European Union to mass-keep the data of people in the European Union, yet this is what the government is putting forward. Some people would say that it is not going to misuse the data and that it would have to get a warrant in this case. However, my issue is not necessarily what the government is going to do with it, but what malicious actors would do with it. Imagine this allegory. The Government of Canada tells every home builder in Canada that they need to make a master key to open all the houses they produce and now it has the master key to open everyone's house in Canada. That is what it is asking the telecommunications companies, the Apples, the Googles and the Metas, for, a master key. Do I think the government or law enforcement are going to misuse it? That is not a serious fear, but who is to say that key is always going to be protected, that vulnerability is not going to be exploited or it would not be stolen by third party actors, foreign governments or malicious criminal networks? The government is creating vulnerabilities in encryption that would impact not just Canadians but people across the world, because the encryption is not just in Canada but across the world. This has now become a trade issue. That is why I am very concerned about this legislation.

Madam Speaker, that is a loaded question, but coming from that member and that party, it is quite ironic. The Conservatives are not the party that gutted mandatory minimums and brought forward legislation that made bail mandatory for violent repeat offenders. We are not the party that has overseen a rise in violent crime and extortion of over 55%. It is a direct result of the current Liberal government's policy. The Liberals call themselves a new government. They have been in power for 11 years, and that is their record. Conservatives will not take any lessons from them.

Madam Speaker, the hon. member was indeed there. It was very concerning because we had the Privacy Commissioner come to committee, and I had received nothing from the Privacy Commissioner prior to the start of that meeting. The Privacy Commissioner was referencing recommendations that he had provided to the committee weeks before, and I had no idea what these recommendations were. There were issues with interpretation and technical issues, but I could not even get transcripts from the meeting that had taken place three weeks before, where we had former justice Deschamps from NSIRA come and provide recommendations to the committee. I could not even reference past committee meetings. Because the government is rushing through this legislation so quickly, we could not even do proper due diligence. It really did impact my ability and all members' ability to be effective in scrutinizing this legislation.

Madam Speaker, the member talks about being a member of a new government. It is the same member, and people can check the Hansard, who has been speaking in this place for nearly 11 years. It is the same talking points. It is the same failed Liberal policies. It is the same Liberal government. In fact, the Liberal Prime Minister was advising former prime minister Justin Trudeau on many of these failed economic policies that we are seeing today, and now we have this legislation coming forward. Canadians, in the last election, did not vote for these policies. They voted to get tough on criminals, but they did not vote for law-abiding Canadians to be subjected to this level of government surveillance.

Mr. Speaker, a number of months ago, my hon. colleague was talking about how food inflation is up 6.2% and how 2.2 million Canadians are currently lined up at food banks. She said that this is because of the Liberal government's industrial carbon tax and fuel standard tax. Does the member still believe that Canadians are lined up at food banks because of her government's carbon tax?

Mr. Speaker, it is a great opportunity for me to rise to speak to Bill S-210. I just want to commend all the speakers today, particularly the last speaker, my colleague from Chatham-Kent—Leamington. I love history, and hearing the stories of people's families, where they have come from and the challenges they have overcome is always an inspiration to me. I thank the member for sharing. I know that many members of the House who are of Ukrainian heritage, or of that region, have shared stories of the hardships their families endured to come here and make Canada their home and to build a life for themselves and the generations after them in our great country. I must say, I am inspired by that. What the legislation is seeking to do is to honour the contributions of over 1.3 million Canadians who have Ukrainian heritage, including many of my friends. My stepfather is also a man of Ukrainian heritage, and I am proud to represent thousands of people of Ukrainian heritage in my constituency, Parkland, just outside Edmonton. The story of Ukrainian Canadians is inseparable from the story of western Canada and, particularly, Alberta. When the first Ukrainian settlers arrived in what is now Alberta in 1892, they came seeking freedom and opportunity to build a better life for their families. The Prairies were a vast, isolated region, largely undeveloped, yet through determination and hard work, these Ukrainian settlers transformed the landscape and turned western Canada into the developed agricultural region that it is today. Ukrainian settlers in Alberta, in particular, established farms. They built churches, opened businesses and created communities. These communities quickly became hubs for agricultural knowledge; cultural traditions such as language, music and dance; and a strong sense of community. Their contributions formed economic and social foundations for western Canada. Some of the earliest Ukrainian settlements in Canada were established just east of what is now my constituency, Parkland, and these communities still stand today. I want to talk about the service that Ukrainian Canadians have given to their adopted country, Canada. During the First World War, many Ukrainian Canadians demonstrated great loyalty to Canada by volunteering to serve in the Canadian Expeditionary Force. Thousands answered the call to defend the country they had chosen as their home, including Ukrainian Canadian recipient of the Victoria Cross, the highest medal of valour in the British Empire, Filip Konowal, who was also a member of the Governor General's Foot Guards, which is a regiment I serve in today. At the same time, though, there is a tragic history. Many thousands of Ukrainians who had immigrated to Canada were classified as enemy aliens by the federal government. Ukraine was not a country at that time. It was under the control of either Russia or Austria-Hungary. Austria-Hungary was a member of the Central Powers, so many Ukrainians, unfortunately, were lumped in with the Austro-Hungarian Empire, which we were at war with, and thus were interned in camps across Canada. They were forced to perform labour under very difficult conditions. Many were sent to very remote locations, including areas that would become part of Banff National Park and Jasper National Park. I think it is important that, when we pass bills such as the one that is before us, we recognize the great sacrifices that Ukrainians made, not only in standing up for our country of Canada but also the sacrifices of the Ukrainians who were put through deprivations by the government at that time. The loyalty of Ukrainian Canadians was demonstrated further during the Second World War. I just recently learned this in my research for the bill. Ukrainian Canadians enlisted in the Canadian military at the highest rate of any demographic other than English Canadians or French Canadians. They served with distinction in every branch of the armed forces. They fought tyranny overseas, and they fought to secure the freedoms we continue to enjoy today. Ukrainians have a very real experience with oppression, knowing what their ancestors faced under the Russian Empire, under Austria-Hungary and under the Soviets, and they understood the value of liberty in a way that many people could take for granted. Those Ukrainian Canadians knew exactly what they were fighting for. Since the arrival of the first Ukrainians in Canada over 135 years ago, they have enriched our country in countless ways. They have contributed to agriculture, business, science, education, public service and art across Canada and, might I say, they produced some of the best hockey players we have ever seen in Canadian history. They have preserved and shared their vibrant culture, including the Vyshyvanka, which continues to thrive across Canada. Ukrainian festivals and heritage celebrations are some of the most wonderful events that people can attend in this country. In my own constituency, we have an organization of Ukrainian dancers who play an important role in preserving and sharing Ukrainian traditions. Since 1983, they have connected countless young Canadians with their heritage through dance, music and cultural education while also recognizing and welcoming those who want to learn more about Ukrainian culture. These organizations have been critical in recent years, as we have seen many Ukrainian war refugees coming to Canada. It is always really interesting to see how people who have been in Canada for over 100 years are connecting with Ukrainians who are just coming to Canada today, in the things that they are learning about each other and the traditions that they are reviving together. These organizations are doing more than just preserving traditions. They are building bridges. My home province of Alberta is home to many significant symbols of Ukrainian heritage. The giants of the Prairies, for one, are icons of Ukrainian heritage. This includes the world's largest perogy, as well as Canada's largest Easter egg. The Ukrainian Cultural Heritage Village, which is just 30 minutes east of Edmonton, captures the early pioneering spirit of Ukrainian Canadians. This is an open-air museum and it hosts authentically restored buildings from across the Prairies. It is host to many school programs that provide generations of Albertans with a closer understanding of Ukrainian settlement in Alberta. The Ukrainian village suffered a devastating fire back in April 2025, but I want everyone in this House and across Canada to know that the village has finally reopened this year, as of May 16, for visitors. If they do have the chance, I highly encourage visiting this. The influence of Ukrainian Canadians is found not only in the west. It is found right here in Ottawa, where the St. Onuphrius Ukrainian Catholic Church has been preserved at the Canadian Museum of History. The original prairies church is still an active parish and provides visitors to the museum a glimpse of the faith that remains the strongest among Ukrainian Canadians today. Canada has also hosted a number of firsts for the Ukrainian community, with one of the most important being the erection of the first monument to the Holodomor. This was completed in Edmonton in 1983 to commemorate the 50th anniversary of this famine genocide. We know in this House and across the world that between 1932 and 1933, millions of Ukrainians were deliberately starved to death by the Soviet Union. This is not natural in any way. This was not the result of a drought or a failed harvest. It was a man-made famine designed to crush the Ukrainian people. For decades, Soviet authorities sought to suppress the knowledge of these atrocities, but the truth has prevailed through the witness testimony of survivors and through the determination of Ukrainian Canadians who have sought justice and have sought to preserve the memory of those lost. Long before the world recognized the Holodomor, members of the Canadian Ukrainian community were fighting to ensure that this crime against humanity would never be forgotten. Conservatives are proud of our long record of standing beside Ukraine and the Ukrainian community within Canada. In fact, Canada was one of the first countries to recognize Ukrainian independence from the Soviets, and Canada became the first western nation to formally recognize Ukraine's independence. In 2008, I was proud that Prime Minister Stephen Harper officially recognized the Holodomor as a genocide. This recognition honoured the memory of those victims. Further, in 2014, when the Russians illegally annexed Crimea, it was Conservatives who stood up under Stephen Harper and delivered a clear message to Vladimir Putin that Russia must respect Ukrainian sovereignty. Once again, I am very proud to speak in favour of this legislation.

Madam Speaker, under the Liberal Prime Minister, Canada is the only G20 country to fall into a recession, with an economic decline in three of the last four quarters. The Parliamentary Budget Officer is saying that the chance the Liberal government will achieve its fiscal anchor is at less than 1%. We are on the brink of a major energy crisis, with rising inflation from higher energy and higher food prices that are guaranteed. Canada is in a recession today, and it is not looking good for the rest of the year. When will the Liberal government reverse course and stop this economic slide?

Madam Speaker, this is great news. The Liberal government is finally taking responsibility for something. If it is taking responsibility for today's job numbers, it must also be responsible for the reason we are in a recession today. It cannot have its cake and eat it too. Canada's economic growth is negative. Energy and food prices are rising dramatically. Canadians cannot take it anymore. The Liberals promised an economy that would move at speeds not seen in generations, but the only thing we see growing is our massive debt. When will they reverse course and stop failing Canadians?

Mr. Speaker, this weekend, from June 5 to 7, thousands will gather in Stony Plain to enjoy the Stony Plain Farmers’ Days Rodeo and Exhibition. Organized in partnership with the Kinsmen Club of Stony Plain, Farmers' Days showcases the agricultural heritage, community spirit and volunteerism that make our region such a special place to call home. For three days, Stony Plain will come alive with the Kinsmen rodeo, parades down Main Street, a midway with games and live entertainment, and the Farmers' Days market featuring over 160 vendors. Families can enjoy activities, from the heavy horse pull to train rides and petting zoos, that are fun for the whole family. Farmers' Days is a celebration of the best of our Parkland region: our hard-working people, volunteers, local businesses and the strong community spirit that brings neighbours together, year after year. I invite everyone to come and enjoy this great celebration in our region. Finally, I want to thank the Town of Stony Plain, the Kinsmen Club, the sponsors, the volunteers and the organizers for making this celebration possible. I wish everyone a fun and enjoyable Farmers' Days weekend.

Mr. Speaker, after over a decade of reckless Liberal inflationary spending, young Canadians are falling further behind than ever before. Last month, Canada lost 47,000 full-time jobs, and youth unemployment is up over 14%. That is more than double the national rate. Young Canadians are now more unemployed than at any point in recorded Canadian history. Young people cannot afford rent, they cannot afford groceries and they certainly cannot afford a home. They are sending out hundreds of résumés with no response. Under these Liberals, it is more taxes, more job losses and more of the same. Why is this Liberal Prime Minister making young Canadians sacrifice for his failures?

Mr. Speaker, I thought that this Liberal Prime Minister was supposed to be good with money, but they just lost $175 million in less than six months on a failing diamond mine that just sought creditor protection. Young Canadians were promised opportunity, but after a decade of Liberal reckless spending, they are getting fewer jobs and less opportunity. This year, Canada has lost 111,000 full-time jobs. We have thousands of skilled workers just waiting for this Liberal government to get out of the way. Unfortunately, it is just more taxes, more job losses and more of the same. Why is this Liberal Prime Minister making young Canadians pay for his economic recklessness?

Madam Speaker, Nobel Prize-winning economist Milton Friedman said there are four ways to spend money, and the worst way is spending somebody else's money on others because it is the least efficient and one is least careful with it. We have seen the Liberal government put $200 million into a concrete slab spaceport in Nova Scotia. When we are talking about a sovereign debt fund of $25 billion, that is the government spending taxpayers' money. I want to ask the parliamentary secretary if he is borrowing money right now to invest in things like spaceports.

Madam Speaker, the Liberal government, for 11 years, has been the worst investor of any government in Canadian history. There is a litany of projects, but I just want to talk about one today. Moltex Energy Canada was purporting to make molten-salt nuclear reactors in New Brunswick. The Liberal government poured $55 million, taxpayer dollars, into this boondoggle. It just went into insolvency and has been sold off for $11 million. Can the member for Calgary Crowfoot talk about the government's poor record of investment? It loves spending taxpayer dollars on its schemes, but taxpayers rarely ever get their money back.

Mr. Speaker, I know the member across said that he is very proud of the government's investments. I wonder if he would tell this House if he is proud of the government's $50-million investment in the molten salt nuclear reactor scam in his very own province by Moltex. The company has now gone into insolvency. It is being sold off for $11 million; 55 million taxpayer dollars down the drain. Is that member proud of that investment?

Mr. Speaker, I think my colleague will agree that the crime rates in this country are far too high, and that is why I think Canadians were very hopeful when the government announced that it would be hiring 1,000 new RCMP officers. However, we have recently learned that of the 1,000 RCMP officers the government claimed it was hiring, only 750 of them are actually going to be frontline officers; 250 of them are going to be civilian support employees. It gets better. The government, under its early retirement incentive, laid off over 300 civilian employees from the RCMP. The government says it is hiring 250 more employees, but it has let go 300 employees and is bringing in only 750 frontline officers. This is an investment illusion under the government. Why is it failing to protect our streets, by underinvesting in police?

Mr. Speaker, after a decade of Liberal policies driving up the cost of living, Canadians are being squeezed like never before. According to the consumer debt index, 61% of Canadians say that they are experiencing financial whiplash, and 64% say that they are working harder than ever but cannot get ahead. Instead of providing relief to struggling Canadians, the Liberals voted against removing taxes of 25¢ a litre for fuel and are driving up the cost of fuel and groceries. Why will the Liberals not provide real relief instead of one-third of the tax cut for one-third of the year?

Mr. Speaker, do members know who is not struggling? It is the federal government, which is bringing in windfall taxes on Canadian fuel costs. Canadians are telling us loud and clear that they are struggling. They are cutting back. They are delaying major life decisions. They are worrying about whether they can pay their bills each month. Instead of providing real relief, the Liberal government is driving up inflation. Despite windfall revenues from soaring gas prices, the government is giving Canadians only one-third the tax cut for one-third of the year. After a decade of the Liberals' policies, even middle-class families are failing to get ahead. It is time to give Canadians a real break. Why will they not?