Dominique O'Rourke

Mr. Speaker, our recent investment summit attracted investors from around the world who wanted to be part of Canada's future. As our country attracts new investment across the entire economy, can the Minister of Transport tell the House about the measures our government is taking to create the right conditions to encourage investment and strengthen the Canadian economy, including in the transportation sector?

Mr. Speaker, the previous question was about what the rush is in terms of passing this legislation. I want to ask my hon. colleague this: When you are out in the community, the amazing Spadina—Harbourfront, are you hearing from people that this is a housing crisis and an emergency, and that they want us to move quickly during construction season? Let us answer this: What is the rush in the House to pass this legislation?

Mr. Speaker, first, I just want to celebrate the Guelph & District Multicultural Festival, which celebrated its 40th anniversary this weekend. I congratulate Anu Saxena, their chair, and also Cinthuja Leon, who is their executive director. It was another amazing weekend. When I am out at these community events, people really want to know how soon we can see the waiver of the HST on new homes in Ontario. My hon. colleague was a municipal councillor, as I was. What is the urgency in passing the legislation and getting the money flowing? How important is that money, in terms of ensuring that people can buy their home now, a new home that would be built in the future, in terms of smoothing out the construction, so that, in fact, we are seeding builds for the next several years?

Mr. Speaker, let us honour the life and legacy of James Ross Hurley, the founding director of the parliamentary internship programme. Created in 1969 by Wellington MP Alf Hales, the program flourished under James Hurley's leadership as a unique, non-partisan opportunity for university graduates to experience parliamentary democracy. Since then, more than 550 young Canadians have participated in the program, including members of this Parliament, members of the Canadian Parliamentary Press Gallery, and alumni who have gone on to hold top positions in the public and private sectors and in non-profit organizations in Canada and around the world. James Hurley devoted his life to public service as a Privy Council Office constitutional adviser to six prime ministers, a beloved mentor and a professor of political science at the University of Ottawa. In March 2025, he left us. In a final act of generosity to the Hales and Hurley Parliamentary Foundation, he ensured that the program would continue in perpetuity. His family, including his sister Ann Gibson, is with us today. James Hurley's legacy will continue to be an inspiration. His legacy to youth, democracy, bilingualism and Canada will inspire generations to come.

Mr. Speaker, Canada has one of the strongest democracies in the world, but we can never take that for granted. We need to protect the independence of our judiciary. We need a strong parliamentary system, and we need strong journalism. Obviously we can never take our democracy for granted. We need to strengthen those institutions. I know that one of the measures that struck me as being particularly important in this legislation is reviewing the ways people can make political donations, including the use of crypto. I wonder if the minister wants to speak to the importance of knowing where the money that fuels our democracy comes from.

Madam Speaker, the minister just answered the question I was going to ask about how this structure actually clarifies the housing spectrum of non-market and market, and how the Canada Lands Company comes in, and so how this new structure will function in a way that is much, much better for proponents. Instead, I will ask the minister about the following. I know the proponents in my riding are going to provide housing for seniors with mental health issues. These are non-market housing units. They are going to get to functional zero in terms of youth homelessness. Minister, what has the response been in the community to Build Canada Homes? What kind of response are you seeing from proponents in the non-profit housing sector?

Mr. Speaker, it is wonderful to have an opportunity to speak again in support of the Build Canada Homes act. This landmark legislation would establish Build Canada Homes as a Crown corporation dedicated to building and expanding the supply of affordable homes for Canadians, truly affordable homes pegged to one's income. We are in a housing crisis. On that, we all agree. Federal efforts to date have been spread across multiple departments and agencies and programs. This limits the government's ability to have maximum impact. Traditional construction and funding approaches are not delivering the scale or speed Canadians need, which is why we are taking this new, consolidated approach. Of course, all Canadians deserve an affordable place to call home, but doing it the same way we have been doing it for generations—

Mr. Speaker, housing is a fundamental need, and growing demand for housing across the country requires urgent action. While the opposition wants to fiddle about with the structure they do not like, we are moving to action. Build Canada Homes would be created to act quickly and efficiently in a more flexible way than ever before. The legislation would give that Crown corporation the flexibility and operational autonomy to deliver on its mandate. As a Crown corporation, it would maintain a clear accountability framework to the government. It would report on those numbers. This would strengthen its ability to build partnerships across the housing system and deliver affordable housing at the scale and speed Canadians require. Rather than silos, there would be broad collaboration. Build Canada Homes would streamline federal housing efforts by acting as a developer, financier, convenor and catalyst for innovation in the housing sector. It would have a central position in forging strong partnerships across all levels of government and with indigenous communities. It would work with non-profits and other key stakeholders in the housing industry, including developers and community organizations, to drive the development of truly affordable housing across Canada. Build Canada Homes cannot act alone. The success of its achievement lies in its partnerships. Stronger collaboration among all levels of government and with key partners is needed to address the housing challenges we face across this country. Build Canada Homes would make it simpler and faster to get large-scale affordable housing projects off the ground. The agency would attract public, private and philanthropic investment, maximizing its impact. Build Canada Homes would make it easier to develop partnerships across the housing ecosystem to bring together the right financing, the right land and the right projects. As a Crown corporation, it would combine access to federal lands, development expertise and flexible financial tools under one roof. This is new. It would accelerate the delivery of affordable housing, working with non-profits, indigenous organizations and all orders of government. This approach reduces risk, eliminates barriers and guides projects through the development process. Sometimes those non-profits are not large, especially in smaller communities. Build Canada Homes could help guide them through this process. We want to get housing financed and built. We will work directly with builders and housing providers that are focused on long-term affordability. This includes, as I said, non-profits, co-ops, community housing providers and organizations that promote a variety of housing options for Canadians. Those strategic partnerships will create homes that are affordable to a range of households across the income spectrum. Build Canada Homes would be empowered to achieve this collaboration through agreements, financial support, joint ventures and shared development initiatives. It would look for strong collaboration and coordination with the provinces and territories to help advance these priority projects, because working together, we can achieve more. This could include providing land, accelerating the approval process and waiving applicable fees. We know indigenous people face unique housing challenges. Build Canada Homes would collaborate on proposals that deliver shared housing outcomes with first nations, Inuit and Métis governments, indigenous housing providers and urban indigenous organizations. Build Canada Homes would meet the housing needs of indigenous communities in a spirit of collaboration. The Government of Canada respects indigenous sovereignty and supports self-determined housing solutions that are designed and delivered with an indigenous-led perspective. Our indigenous partners know how to incorporate culture and adopt housing solutions in ways that enable their communities to thrive. Paired with the infrastructure investments this government has announced and has begun, this could be a game-changer. Since its launch, Build Canada Homes has moved quickly to get housing projects off the ground. The Government of Canada has identified public lands that can be converted into housing. We have partnered with local governments to cut red tape and fast-track approvals. In April, the Government of Canada and the Government of Quebec announced an initial partnership to create nearly 865 new affordable housing units in the province. The total investment in affordable housing, supportive housing and transitional housing in the province amounts to $200 million. This investment is being shared between Build Canada Homes and the Quebec government. In Ontario, Arbo at Downsview will be home to 540 new homes and a future 1,700 new homes. In Ottawa, 1,100 homes have been announced. Eventually, there will be 3,000 homes. The thing is that we do not build this stuff overnight. We have to assemble the land. We need the investors. We have to align the trades. We have to prep the site. We need the site to be serviced. What might start with a small number can actually grow over time, and I think we are missing that point. By working together, the federal and provincial governments could accelerate the approvals process and identify additional housing projects. Those combined investments would help build more affordable housing in the communities that need them the most. It is local knowledge and local projects with a lot of federal support and guidance. In March 2026, the Government of Canada, through Build Canada Homes, and the Province of New Brunswick partnered to deliver affordable housing. This partnership is accelerating the delivery of up to 1,200 shovel-ready affordable homes, again with the potential to scale that to 1,500 homes. There are land constraints to be considered as well. Build Canada Homes and New Brunswick are each contributing up to $150 million toward the project. We can see the collaboration. It would be great to have more of it in this place. Together, New Brunswick and Build Canada Homes are working to attract additional municipal, private and philanthropic partners to expand toward a 1,500-home target. At least half of those homes would serve lower-income Canadians, and a minimum of 160 homes would provide supportive and transitional housing. Approximately 30% of those, up to 450 homes, would be smaller and in rural centres, which is so critical. Small numbers are not small potatoes, because those homes matter to every single family. In January 2023, the Government of Canada, the Government of Nunavut and Nunavut Tunngavik Inc. signed an agreement in principle that will deliver up to 750 much-needed homes across the territory. That is a lot of homes in the Arctic. This will be public, affordable and supportive housing. Through this agreement, Build Canada Homes would again provide a matching investment with the Government of Nunavut. As part of this partnership, approximately 30% of the units would be built off-site to incorporate modern methods of construction. This will streamline building processes and help accelerate the delivery of housing, making the most of the short construction season in the north while keeping costs down. Those first units are expected to be completed soon. Pacd Homes, in my riding of Guelph, has designed homes that can be flat-packed and shipped. They can be assembled in a matter of weeks. This kind of innovation is a game changer. In Nova Scotia, Build Canada Homes has secured something that is close to my heart. It would develop 1,430 new affordable homes. That includes 500 units of non-profit and community housing from the province's housing pipeline. Of those, 300 units would be built in Shannon Park, where I went to junior high. That includes supportive and/or transitional housing and public housing. I do not know about Nova Scotia, but in Ontario, there has been an absolute dearth of investment in social housing. We need it badly. We need supportive housing badly, and this government is moving to create it. Through Build Canada Homes, all levels of government would come together to address this housing crisis. We would increase the supply of affordable housing and reduce barriers to construction through a structured and collaborative approach. With private, public and government partners showing up at the table, we would get homes built. We would grow and strengthen partnerships because it is an integral aspect of building homes for Canadians. This legislation would allow Build Canada Homes to operate at arm's length from the government, manage assets, deploy innovative financial tools and make long-term investment decisions more efficiently. This is the power of partnership: implementing transformative change. We are working together to build a strong and more unified approach to truly affordable housing across this country.

Mr. Speaker, it is an excellent question. It speaks to the spirit of collaboration that exists in this legislation. Because there would be multiple departments that might be involved, Build Canada Homes could help coordinate that. I also talked in my remarks about the partnerships with the provinces and territories. It would not be up to the Government of Canada to make those decisions. They would be made in partnership with its provincial and territorial counterparts.

Mr. Speaker, that is an extremely important problem. If that is really the case, it is a shame that there was such turmoil in the transition between programs. The member has an email address where she can directly make demands and ask questions of Build Canada Homes. I would encourage her to do so. What I would say is that Build Canada Homes will provide far more housing for abused women and people in precarious situations. We know that affordable housing is key; it is vital for women to be able to escape violent situations. We completely agree on that. The goal is really to invest so that we can build more affordable housing, as well as transitional housing.

Mr. Speaker, every province is going to have a different municipal act. Every province is going to have different regulations. Every municipality may as well. That collaboration is important, and so is streamlining some of those rules so that we can move faster. The provinces clearly need to collaborate. It is often their responsibility to ultimately provide the supports that go into supportive housing. All of this is intended to accelerate where there is provincial will, territorial will and first nations interest so that we can work together to find solutions for a project that are suitable for its context. That is the difference with Build Canada Homes. It can bring in land. It can help with financing and it may know of other investors. This new structure creates that flexibility.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for her speech. She is a tireless champion in the fight against gender-based violence. We have had several opportunities to discuss this issue. Her speech conveyed her sincerity and how hard she works on this issue. We now have the opportunity to pass a bill that will enable us to make progress. I would like to know what steps my colleague envisions taking next.

Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, as my colleague for Winnipeg North was beginning his remarks, a member from the Conservative caucus yelled, “He's off his meds.” Members would never yell, “They're off their insulin.” To disparage Canadians who are dealing with mental health is unparliamentary, and it deserves an apology.

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Around 2:30 p.m., the member for Drummond used unparliamentary language, and several of us heard him. We call on him to withdraw his comments and apologize to the House.

Mr. Speaker, every day, we hear news stories about how widespread and devastating intimate partner and sexual violence is in Canada. Frequently in the House, members stand to talk about a tragedy that has occurred in their community. According to the Canadian Femicide Observatory for Justice and Accountability, 147 women and girls were killed in Canada in 2025 in cases classified as femicide. That is one woman every two days. At December 6 vigils in my community, we read the names of the women killed in Ontario and we hear their stories. These are not isolated incidents or private matters; they are part of a systemic crisis with costs in our homes, in our schools, in our communities, in our court systems, in this place and across Canada. About one in three police-reported violent incidents involves intimate partner violence, and we know that is the tip of the iceberg, because the last thing somebody wants to do in the worst moment of their life is pick up the phone, call the police and have the cars outside with maybe kids in the house. In Ontario, nearly 100 municipalities have declared intimate partner violence an epidemic. I am proud to say Guelph is one of them. A recent report shows that sexual violence costs nearly $15 billion every year in Canada. Members can think about the lost wages of the victims and the costs of the lawyers, the counselling, the investigation, the courts, all of it, not to mention the deep social costs, which can last for generations through individual, family and community trauma and adverse childhood experiences. Could there be a more adverse childhood experience than sexual abuse and exploitation? Police have reported that child sexual abuse and exploitation material offending is now more than 12 times higher than it was in 2008. From prevention to prosecution and community support, we need to address this epidemic in many ways. Bill C-16 is part of the legislative solution. It is one part, but it is urgent and important progress. The protecting victims act would be one of the most significant updates to Canada's criminal justice system in generations. While broad in scope, the bill can be clearly understood through four core pillars: tackling gender-based and intimate partner violence, protecting children from predators, strengthening victims' rights and addressing court delays. Together, these reforms would modernize the Criminal Code to respond to contemporary threats, intervene earlier to prevent escalating violence and ensure that the justice system works faster and more fairly for victims and survivors. What I hear from some women is that the justice system is in service to the law and not in service to victims. The bill would take decisive action to prevent violence before it becomes lethal and reflect the gravity of modern forms of abuse. It would address femicide, coercive and controlling conduct, criminal harassment and the non-consensual distribution of intimate images, including AI-generated sexual deepfakes. We know there has been a story in the news in the last couple of days of women who have been subjected to this type of abuse. These reforms would recognize patterns of control and exploitation that often precede physical violence and would ensure they are treated seriously under the law. This means creating a new offence prohibiting coercive control, which is a pattern of coercive and controlling conduct toward an intimate partner. If people missed it, I would refer them to the remarks provided by the member for Spadina—Harbourfront, who described it very well. We need to get to a place where there is no more “awful but lawful” when it comes to controlling someone's behaviour. Let it be known that coercive control will become a crime. Bill C-16 recognizes femicide as automatic first-degree murder, and provides the following circumstances for what would be murder in the first degree, known as femicide when committed against a female person: (i) the murder is committed against an intimate partner in the context of a pattern of coercive or controlling conduct, (ii) the murder is committed in the context of sexual violence, (iii) the murder is committed in the context of human trafficking, or (iv) the murder is motivated by hate; All of these would require the courts to consider life imprisonment for manslaughter committed in those circumstances. Bill C‑16 would address criminal harassment by removing the requirement to prove that the victim subjectively feared for their safety and replacing it with a requirement to prove that the harassing conduct could reasonably be expected to cause the victim to believe that someone’s safety is threatened, removing the need for victim testimony. We have all seen news stories where a woman is not believed until it is tragically much too late. Bill C‑16 would ensure that the offence captures harassing conduct committed through modern technology as well. The scope of that is mind-blowing, from abusers who are sending messages through bank transaction memo sections to those who are monitoring people's whereabouts. With respect to the new scourge of our time, sexual deepfakes, Bill C‑16 would address those by amending the offence of “non-consensual distribution of an intimate image” to include those deepfakes. The bill would also protect children from predators. Child victims face unique vulnerabilities. Predators increasingly rely on digital tools to lure, manipulate and extort children. This includes threats to distribute images, deepfake technology and the use of explicit bestiality depictions to groom children. Let us think about that for just a minute. Current laws do not fully capture these behaviours and courts have struck down several mandatory minimum penalties for child sexual offences, creating uncertainty around sentencing and weakening deterrence. This bill would strengthen Canada's response to child sexual exploitation both online and off-line. It would update offences to reflect how predators groom, manipulate and exploit children today while reinforcing accountability and prevention. Mandatory minimum penalties would be strengthened for predators who possess or access child sexual abuse and exploitation material, including restoring more than 12 mandatory minimum penalties for a range of child sexual offences that were previously struck down by courts. We would bring them back in a way that is constitutional. We would criminalize the threat to distribute child sexual abuse material and the distribution of bestiality depictions used to groom children. That is child sextortion, which are two words that really should never, ever be said side by side. We would expand child luring and sextortion offences, and we would also create a new offence for recruiting a person under 18 to participate in criminal activity. This is particularly important in sex trafficking. We would strengthen the reporting of child sexual abuse and exploitation material by bolstering mandatory reporting and data preservation obligations for online service providers. Victims' rights also require modernization. The Canadian Victims Bill of Rights provides important protections, but many victims report difficulty accessing information, navigating procedures or having their interests reflected in decisions that affect them. Calls for clearer rights and expanded access to information have been consistent across provincial and federal reports. The bill would reinforce a victim-centred and trauma-informed justice system by enhancing the Canadian Victims Bill of Rights and improving victims' participation, protection and access to information across criminal, military and correctional systems. We would do that by affirming victims' right to be treated with respect, courtesy, compassion and fairness, which I cannot believe we have to legislate. This means that, in other contexts, we need to ensure ongoing training for the whole spectrum of people who are in victim services, from the very first point of contact to the judges who see them in court. We need to provide victims with information proactively without requiring a formal request. We would expand access to testimonial aids for victims of offences committed by an intimate partner. The bill would clarify victims' rights to present impact statements at sentencing, parole and correction stages as well as enhance disclosure of information to victims under the Corrections and Conditional Release Act. Bill C‑16 would finally address court delays and strengthen system integrity. The Ottawa Citizen has reported that, in 2023 to 2024, 55% of adult criminal cases were stayed or dismissed in Ontario. Courts are struggling with serious delays. The Supreme Court's decision in R. v. Jordan established strict timelines for bringing cases to trial. While the federal government designs criminal law, the administration of justice is shared with provinces and territories, which are responsible for policing, prosecution services, court resources and provincial judges. Despite strong federal efforts to appoint judges, delays persist in many jurisdictions, including Ontario, due to resourcing pressures. These delays have resulted in cases, including sexual offences, being dismissed entirely. magine. These reforms would build a justice system that responds earlier—

Mr. Speaker, as I said at the start of my remarks, I believe this requires a collective effort. The federal government, just like the provinces, can pass legislation and then ensure it has the necessary resources for trials. That said, as everyone knows, some people continually abuse the court system, and we must absolutely stand together to oppose this.

Mr. Speaker, I would absolutely share the position of the Secretary of State for Combatting Crime that this is urgently needed legislation. It would immediately restore 12 mandatory minimum penalties in a way that is constitutional. It would protect children. It would protect victims of crime. I hope that all members will support the legislation, just as members on this side of the House have supported a number of private member's bills, because we can all care about intimate partner violence.

Mr. Speaker, I am in no way assuming that the members opposite will not support this bill. I am inviting them to support this bill, just as we have supported a number of private members' bills that also address intimate partner violence. When it comes to this type of scourge, an epidemic, we need to put down the partisanship and move forward with the progress. The justice committee has met nine times, heard from 54 witnesses and received 60 written briefs on this study alone. It considered over 100 amendments, which have added to strengthening the bill. What is is important is that any legislation passed in the House be constitutional. Who gets to decide that? It is the courts.

Mr. Speaker, there are often times in the House when we can find common ground. I think we can all agree on the fact that a sovereign Canada, a sovereign country, has the right to make decisions on matters within its borders. If someone wants to sell something in Canada, we have the right to make safety, environmental or tax regulations. It is also a fact that Canadians want us to be self-sufficient. We are in a tariff war, as others have mentioned, and we have the right to make decisions accordingly. I am shocked that the Conservatives are calling the Americans our friends when they are imposing unfair tariffs on us. We can, however, agree on the importance of Quebec and Canadian culture. My colleague talked about a geographic injustice, but there is also the matter of the American and anglophone culture flooding in. Would my colleague not agree—