Parliamentary Speeches

moved: That a message be sent to the Senate to acquaint Their Honours that, in relation to Bill C-14, An Act to amend the Criminal Code, the Youth Criminal Justice Act and the National Defence Act (bail and sentencing), the House: agrees with amendments 1(a), 2(a) and 3 made by the Senate; respectfully disagrees with amendment 1(b) because subsection 515(13.1) of the Criminal Code already requires courts to state on the record that they considered section 493.2 in making a bail decision, rendering the additional provision unnecessary; respectfully disagrees with amendment 2(b) because engagement with relevant partners and stakeholders is already permitted, and the additional statutory consultation requirement could limit flexibility in the preparation and tabling of the report. Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to share my time with the member for Ajax.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak to the message received from the Senate concerning Bill C-14, the bail and sentencing reform act. At the outset, I would like to thank the senators for their careful study of the legislation. The Senate plays an important role in our parliamentary system. It provides sober second thought, hears from witnesses, reviews legislation clause by clause and proposes amendments where it believes improvements can be made. That is precisely what occurred with Bill C-14. After reviewing the bill, the Senate adopted four amendments. The motion before the House today proposes that we agree with two of those amendments, amend one of them and respectfully disagree with another. I believe that this approach strikes the right balance. It recognizes valuable contributions made through the Senate's review, while ensuring that the legislation would remain faithful to the objectives Parliament has pursued throughout its study of the bill. Before turning to the amendments, I think it is important to briefly remind members why Bill C-14 was introduced in the first place. Across Canada, communities have been raising concerns about public safety. Premiers, mayors, police leaders, victims' advocates and frontline organizations have all called for action to address serious violent offending, repeat offending, organized criminal activity, extortion and human trafficking. Canadians have seen a troubling rise in violent extortion targeting businesses and families. Communities have experienced growing concerns about organized crime and repeat violent offenders. Transit workers and other frontline workers have called for stronger protections. Provincial and territorial governments have repeatedly asked the federal government to review the criminal law framework to ensure that our laws respond effectively to evolving public safety challenges. Bill C-14 is that response. The legislation would strengthen the bail system for certain serious offences by expanding reverse onus provisions in carefully defined circumstances. It would create new tools to address violent repeat offending. It would strengthen sentencing provisions for serious crimes, including extortion and arson committed for criminal purposes. It would respond to the growing threat posed by organized criminal activity and human trafficking. It would improve public safety while preserving judicial discretion and maintaining consistency with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The bill has been studied extensively. The House committee heard testimony from witnesses. Amendments were proposed and debated. Members from all parties contributed to its development. The Senate undertook its own review and proposed several amendments for the House's consideration. The first amendment before us relates to sureties. As members know, during the House committee study, an amendment was adopted to prohibit individuals who had been convicted of an indictable offence within the previous 10 years from acting as surety. The Senate amendment would maintain that prohibition while providing limited judicial discretion in circumstances where no other surety is available and where the court determines that allowing the surety would be in the best interest of justice. The government supports this amendment, which would maintain the fundamental objective adopted by the House. Individuals convicted of serious offences would continue to be prohibited from serving as a surety. At the same time, it recognizes that exceptional circumstances may arise. Witnesses who appeared before the Senate raised concerns regarding the practical impact of a complete prohibition in certain remote, rural and northern communities where the pool of available sureties may be limited. The amendment provides a narrow and carefully structured mechanism that would allow courts to address those exceptional circumstances while preserving the overall intent of the provision. For that reason, we believe the Senate amendment represents a reasonable refinement and should be supported. The second amendment concerns the annual reporting requirements related to bail data. Members will recall that the House adopted an amendment requiring the Minister of Justice to table an annual report respecting bail data. The Senate amendment proposes two changes. First, it would require that the information respecting rates of detention before trial be included in that report. Second, it would require the minister to consult individuals and organizations with expertise in data collection and the criminal justice system, including Statistics Canada, when preparing the report. The government supports the first part of this amendment. Information relating to pretrial detention can contribute to a fuller understanding of how the bail system operates across this country. Reliable data is important. Evidence‑based policy is important. Parliamentarians would benefit by having access to meaningful information about the operation of the criminal justice system. However, the government does not support the second portion of the Senate amendment. The minister already has the ability to engage with relevant partners, experts and organizations when preparing reports and evaluating criminal justice data. Creating a specific statutory requirement is unnecessary and could reduce flexibility in how information is gathered and reports are prepared. As a result, the motion proposes an amendment that would retain the reporting component while removing the mandatory consultation requirement. I believe this approach appropriately balances accountability with operational flexibility. The third Senate amendment concerns proposed subsection 515(13.2), of the Criminal Code. This amendment would require a justice to ask on the record whether section 493.2 applies, even where neither party has raised the issue during the bail hearing. The government respectfully disagrees with this amendment. The reason is straightforward: Existing law already addresses this issue. Subsection 515(13.1) of the Criminal Code already requires courts to state on the record how section 493.2 was considered in making a bail decision. In practice, this requirement already necessitates consideration of whether section 493.2 applies. As a result, the proposed amendment would not create a new substantive obligation. Instead, it would duplicate requirements that already exist within the Criminal Code. For that reason, the government believes the amendment is unnecessary. The final amendment relates to the coming into force of provisions respecting access to youth records. The amendment would provide that these provisions come into force on a day to be fixed by the order of the Governor in Council. The government supports this amendment. The amendment reflects a practical implementation approach and would help ensure that all relevant partners have sufficient time to prepare for the coming into force of these provisions. It would not alter the policy objective adopted by Parliament. Rather, it would support effective implementation. After careful consideration, the government believes that the package before the House today strikes the right balance. It would accept Senate amendments that improve the legislation, propose a targeted modification where appropriate, and respectfully reject an amendment that is unnecessary because its objective is already achieved through existing law. Most importantly, it would preserve the core purpose of Bill C‑14. Canadians expect Parliament to respond to serious public safety concerns. They expect us to provide law enforcement and the justice system with effective tools. They expect us to address violent offending, organized crime, extortion and human trafficking. They expect us to work collaboratively and move legislation forward when consensus has largely been achieved. Bill C‑14 has now been studied by both chambers of Parliament. The House has done its work. The Senate has done its work. The amendments before us have been carefully reviewed. I encourage members to support the motion before the House so Bill C‑14 can proceed without any further delay and continue its path forward for royal assent.

Mr. Speaker, first of all, I think the member should read the bill. The whole bill is about offenders, people who have broken criminal laws. The bill is about strengthening our bail system so there would be a reverse onus and so criminals would not get released if they are violent repeat offenders or have committed crimes like extortion. It is to enhance the sentencing on them. I think everyone knows that the Liberals are on par to creating tougher sentencing laws for those who need it.

Mr. Speaker, it is extremely important. As we all know, in Surrey and places across the country, crimes like shootings and extortions have been rampant and are on the rise. This bill would help in two ways. One is the reverse onus so that those who are charged would not be given bail. Serious offenders would be kept behind bars so that others in the community can feel safe. The other would give the power to the judge to give consecutive sentences, rather than complementary, concurrent sentencing. If somebody were to be sentenced for multiple crimes, they would serve them on top of each other, with the cumulative time together. It is very important.

Mr. Speaker, I think the intent is not about whether someone is indigenous or not. It is about rural and remote communities, where a person seeking to get a surety has very few options. There may be 20, 30, 50 or 60 people in those communities. It is a matter of that small pool. If there is no available surety for that person and they can prove it, the judge would then have the discretion or liberty to allow someone charged with that offence to provide a surety. When there is an abundance of people who can provide a surety, there would be no carve-out.

Mr. Speaker, this has been very favourable among the police forces across the country, the law enforcement agencies and virtually every province. I spoke with the Solicitor General and the Attorney General of British Columbia, who are both very supportive of this. They gave their consultation and their comments. This is reflective of what Canadian law enforcement, Canadian Crown councils, the Canadian legal community and, most of all, the Canadian public have been demanding.

Mr. Speaker, the member from Nanaimo knows a lot of the issues that are particular to the island. Market housing works really well in places like Nanaimo, and can probably be the solution that she is expressing would be valid there, but urban markets with the missing middle are a challenging place. Regardless of the red tape and other things, it is very hard for builders and developers to develop there. How does the member consider developers should be incentivized to build in those areas without a Build Canada Homes-like approach?

Mr. Speaker, this is a great opportunity for me to rise in support of Bill C-20, the Build Canada Homes act. The challenge before us is significant. Too many Canadians are struggling to find a home they can afford, and too many communities are facing housing shortages that continue to drive up costs. That is why our government launched Build Canada Homes in September 2025 with a clear mandate to build affordable homes, support builders with financing and encourage innovative construction methods using Canadian technology, workers and lumber. In just a few short months, Build Canada Homes has already begun advancing projects and establishing partnerships across the country. Bill C-20 would build on that early progress by establishing Build Canada Homes as a Crown corporation, providing it with the operational autonomy and dedicated governance needed to scale up efforts to address Canada's housing crisis. By transitioning Build Canada Homes from a special operating agency to a Crown corporation, the legislation would strengthen its ability to deliver on its mandate at scale while maintaining accountability to Parliament and to Canadians. All Canadians deserve an affordable place to call home. Housing is a fundamental need, and the growing demand for housing across the country requires urgent action, which means that this is about more than creating a new institution. It is about giving Build Canada Homes the tools it needs to build more homes more quickly. As we consider the legislation before us today, it is worth revisiting exactly what Build Canada Homes was designed to achieve. Build Canada Homes was created to build and finance affordable housing at scale while helping to catalyze a more productive and innovative homebuilding industry. It makes it simpler and faster to get large-scale affordable housing projects off the ground, attracting public, private and philanthropic investment. thus maximizing impact. Build Canada Homes does more than fund individual projects. It is a new way of doing business. Its goal is to unlock opportunities across the country by partnering with governments, builders, non-profits and investors to identify and scale high-impact housing solutions. It is also helping modernize Canada's homebuilding sector by supporting innovative approaches, including modern methods of construction. Build Canada Homes is helping create the conditions needed to build more homes more quickly and more efficiently. This is particularly important at a time in Canada when Canada needs to significantly increase its housing supply. Build Canada Homes is helping build the capacity needed to meet that challenge. As a Crown corporation, Build Canada Homes would combine access to federal lands, development expertise and flexible financial tools under one roof. It would work alongside non-profits, indigenous organizations and all orders of government to help move projects from concept to construction and to accelerate the delivery of affordable housing. It would also work in close partnership with developers, investors, manufacturers and housing providers focused on long-term affordability. This includes non-profits, co-operatives, community housing providers or organizations that promote a variety of housing options for Canadians. These strategic partnerships would create homes that are affordable to a range of households across the income spectrum. These partnerships are about building capacity, supporting innovation and creating the conditions for more homes to be built across Canada, which is what makes the legislation before us today so important. By establishing Build Canada Homes as a Crown corporation, Bill C-20 would provide the agency with the operational autonomy and governance structure needed to pursue its mission more effectively. It would also provide Build Canada Homes with the flexibility needed to hold assets, make investments and make long-term decisions that support the delivery of affordable housing. Together, these tools would strengthen its ability to deliver on its mandate and build more homes for Canadians. These are exactly the kinds of tools needed to increase housing supply and accelerate construction across the country. Partnerships with provinces and territories are central to the success of Build Canada Homes. Whether through land financing, housing expertise or construction-ready projects, provinces and territories play a critical role in increasing housing supply and helping more homes get built. Allow me to use my home province of British Columbia as an example. Build Canada Homes and BC Housing have partnered to deliver at least 1,100 homes, including supportive, transitional and affordable rental housing. This partnership will make use of standardized designs, Canadian-made prefabricated components and modern methods of construction to reduce costs, improve quality, shorten construction timelines and help increase housing construction at scale. These approaches demonstrate how innovation can play a critical role in addressing Canada's housing shortage. This is only the first phase of a broader commitment between Canada and British Columbia. By aligning federal investment with construction-ready projects, Build Canada Homes is helping move projects from plans to shovels in the ground, while laying the foundation for thousands more homes in future phases. This is exactly the type of collaboration Build Canada Homes was created to support. It demonstrates how governments can work together to increase housing supply while helping to modernize the homebuilding sector. Importantly, it also demonstrates the potential of Build Canada Homes as a national institution. In just a few short months, it has advanced projects and partnerships representing thousands of homes across the country. Bill C‑20 is about turning that early momentum into sustained long-term results. By establishing Build Canada Homes as a Crown corporation, we would be strengthening its ability to support more projects, deepen partnerships and help deliver more homes for Canadians. However, that is not all. In addition to helping build more houses, Build Canada Homes is also helping build a stronger Canadian economy. By prioritizing projects and partnerships that invest in sustainable Canadian materials, strengthen Canadian supply chains and create good jobs through the homebuilding process, Build Canada Homes is helping advance the federal government's buy Canadian strategy. This means Canadian lumber, Canadian building materials, Canadian manufacturing and Canadian construction expertise. Across the board, Build Canada Homes is helping ensure that public investments create economic benefits here at home. In a changing global economy, strengthening domestic capacity matters. Build Canada Homes is helping increase housing supply while supporting Canadian workers, Canadian businesses and Canadian innovation. The partnerships and projects already under way demonstrate what Build Canada Homes can achieve. Bill C‑20 is about scaling up what is already working. It is about building the partnerships, capacity and innovative construction approaches needed to deliver more homes for Canadians in the years ahead. By establishing Build Canada Homes as a Crown corporation, the legislation would provide the governance, flexibility and financial capacity needed to build on that progress and to deliver on its mandate at a greater scale. It would allow Build Canada Homes to hold assets, make investments, deploy innovative financial tools and pursue long-term opportunities more effectively, while maintaining a clear accountability framework to Parliament and Canadians. At a time when Canadians need more homes built more quickly and more affordably, Bill C‑20 would help ensure that Build Canada Homes has the tools it needs to deliver. I urge all members opposite to support it.

Mr. Speaker, I think this is a Crown corporation that would take a lot of federal lands, provincial lands and municipal lands and build quickly and efficiently. It would actually hold, in a lot of cases, those assets in the Crown corporation, and the revenue from that would hopefully help build more homes going forward. It would also help expedite a lot of the process. I think it is much needed. Canada has tried many other things, and I think this is a time when more homes are needed more quickly. We need an agency like this that has the agility, the financial firepower and the power behind it to build these homes much more quickly.

Mr. Speaker, that is a great question, and I apologize for not being able to answer in French. I think it gives, first, the financial tools. There is $13 billion seeded in it, so it has a lot of financial capability. It has the necessary vehicles, whether that is using CMHC or its own funding, the new building code with pre-approved designs, and encouraging modular design and working with modular providers. These are the types of tools that give it the assets and capabilities to move much more quickly and much more efficiently, and also to innovate in the industry in a time when sometimes the private sector is a little hesitant to do that. That is the ability it has, and as a Crown corporation, it would have more power than a special body.

Mr. Speaker, that is a great question. The affordability measurement is, I think, 30% of pre-tax income of a household, as a means of affordability. That is the test case, so it varies, obviously. In areas where perhaps housing costs are lower, there might be less of a need for Build Canada Homes, but I think that in most cases, Canadians are feeling the pinch in having to pay a lot more than 30% of their monthly income toward housing. The goal is to build the type of housing for which people do not have to pay more than 30% of their household income.

Mr. Speaker, I would disagree with that. When Build Canada Homes makes its judgments, including for the 1,100 homes that are being built in British Columbia, it uses a varied metric of all types of housing, such as three-bedroom units in these buildings, two-bedroom, one-bedroom and accessible units. It is designed and built for a mosaic of the families that need them. If that needs to be adjusted, I would welcome the Conservatives' comments at committee to make sure that Build Canada Homes does that.

Mr. Speaker, the only party in the House that is bringing that fear is the Conservative Party of Canada. The only party in British Columbia that is doing that is the Conservative Party of British Columbia, and the only reason they are doing this is to instill fear. Everyone knows that their private property rights are not at risk. The government is defending them as we speak, and that is how we will always protect the property rights of all individuals in Canada.

Mr. Speaker, let me be clear. The federal government is defending the property rights. The property rights are not at risk. The only people who are saying the property rights are at risk are the Conservatives over here and their counterparts in the province of British Columbia. They know it and we know it. The Canadian government will always defend private property rights. None of the treaty agreements take away those rights. We will defend the rights of Canadians. They are just disseminating fear in the hearts of British Columbians and Canadians for the wrong reasons.

Mr. Speaker, Canada's humanitarian assistance is making a real difference on the ground. Through trusted partners, we have helped provide nearly 5.7 million meals to families in need. We have supported emergency medical assistance to almost 16,000 patients and health services to 35,000 more. We are helping 40 primary care health facilities across Lebanon stay open, and improving access to essential medical care for the most vulnerable. These are just a few examples of the life-saving support that Canadians are helping provide. For families fleeing violence and facing displacement, hunger and loss, it makes a real difference. It is something Canadians can be proud of.

Mr. Speaker, another unique feature of the Waterloo region is how technology intersects development. KA Imaging is a great example of how Canadian innovation can have an impact both domestically and globally. Through Grand Challenges Canada, our government supports innovators that are developing and scaling solutions to some of the world's most pressing health challenges, from improving maternal and newborn care to strengthening health systems in challenging contexts. Our government reaffirmed our support for GCC to ensure that Canadian innovators continue to turn bold ideas into life-saving solutions.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to have the opportunity today to speak about Bill C-22, the lawful access bill. There is no issue more pressing in the law enforcement legal framework than lawful access, a tool that is essential for police and prosecution to do the work to expeditiously catch people accused of many violent crimes. The world around us is becoming increasingly digital and networked. Much of our day-to-day business communication and overall lives relies on the Internet. Smart phones, emails and instant messaging apps easily and instantly transcend provincial and national borders. Unfortunately, this also means that malicious actors, such as organized crime groups and violent extremists, can exploit the borderless nature of cyberspace for their own benefit. Canada's law enforcement agencies and CSIS need modern tools to help keep communities safe. We must close the capacity gap in current legislation that prevents law enforcement and CSIS from having lawful access to data, and must ensure that they can properly execute their mandates and protect Canadians. “Lawful access” is a term we will hear a lot in association with the bill, but let us be clear what it really means. Lawful access covers the tools and authorities used to legally obtain certain information, data or communication during investigations. This information is often essential to generating leads on national security threats and serious criminal activities, such as extortion and organized crime, as well as to identifying and prosecuting the people involved. For decades, law enforcement and CSIS have had to operate without a legal framework requiring electronic service providers, ESPs, to develop and maintain lawful access capabilities. The current legal framework dates from before the invention of cellphones and has not kept pace with the rapid advances in technology. This is important because law enforcement and intelligence investigators need basic subscriber information, such as a legal name or an address, to identify or exclude suspects, particularly during preliminary stages. Bill C-22 would establish a legal framework requiring electronic service providers to have the capability to respond to legally authorized requests, such as a warrant or a production order, while respecting protecting privacy interests and fundamental rights. It would introduce provisions to support law enforcement as it cracks down on crime in an increasingly complex technological landscape where the vast majority of evidence is online or electronic. Law enforcement groups have sounded the alarm about the obstacles they encounter in their investigations. For instance, imagine a person getting a call from an extortionist demanding money and threatening their family if they do not pay. They call 911, tell the police who called and show them the messages they received. Under the current framework, it would take weeks or even months for the police to find out basic information such as who or where the call came from. This is just one example of the many challenges law enforcement officials face in obtaining the information they need. Often they do not know which service provider holds the customer account associated with the subscriber information, which also means they do not know whom to serve with a production order. This challenge currently stalls and delays real-world investigations. In many cases, law enforcement is required to seek multiple judicial authorizations to seek very basic information from different service providers, just to confirm which service provider's phone number or IP address the call was made from. The current framework causes significant, unnecessary and potentially harmful delays. Timely access to the basic information is crucial in all stages of an investigation and can mean the difference between securing evidence and allowing criminals to slip through law enforcement's fingers. Here is another example. Police are aware that a provider holds certain information, but the company cannot provide it because their systems do not possess the capability to do so, as there is no legal requirement to carry such capabilities. We have heard many stories of law enforcement tracking a missing child or attempting to stop a terrorist attack, knowing which service provider to obtain the information from but being stonewalled by the provider's lack of lawful access capabilities. We cannot hope to fully protect Canadians and our communities if law enforcement and CSIS are unable to do their jobs. For this reason, Bill C-22 would introduce new legislation to close that gap, whereby certain ESPs would need to develop and maintain the technological capabilities to respond to production orders. To be clear, this aspect of the legislation intentionally and explicitly would not allow for backdoor access or any direct access for law enforcement or CSIS into electronic service provider systems. A legal authority to access that information would still always be required. Bill C-22 proposes two ways by which an ESP would be asked to develop and maintain lawful access capabilities. First, those designated as core providers, such as traditional telecom companies, would have to abide by specific requirements set out in regulations. Second, the Minister of Public Safety could issue a ministerial order to develop specific capabilities based on operational needs as new technologies develop. We have heard the concerns from parliamentarians and stakeholders around privacy and oversight. I want to reassure Canadians that Bill C-22 includes safeguards so ESPs would not have to abide by any demands that would introduce systemic vulnerabilities in electronic protections, such as encryption breaking or backdoor access. This would also require that the Minister of Public Safety obtain the approval of the intelligence commissioner before a ministerial order is valid, and it would be subject to further review by the National Security and Intelligence Review Agency. Bill C-22 is about removing harmful barriers that impede active investigations and delay justice as well as put Canadians in harm's way. It is about bringing our legislation up to date with modern technologies and those of our closest allies and partners. It is about ensuring that alleged extortionists, child predators, cybercriminals, hostile state actors and organized criminal networks have nowhere to hide. Law enforcement leaders have been very clear with us. I will quote the National Police Federation, which said, “For frontline police officers, the ability to lawfully identify who owns an online account is often the first step in investigating crimes such as extortion, child sexual exploitation, organized crime, violent offences, and national security threats. Bill C-22 will help ensure that longstanding court orders and warrants remain effective in a modern digital environment.” They need us to act now to eliminate these gaps in our legislation. I am urging hon. members to support the bill for the crucial public safety measure it would be.

Mr. Speaker, we could have amended Bill C-2. It was the second bill introduced in the current session of the House, which shows the importance the government places on law enforcement and getting the tools that are needed. It was after those consultations that the government listened to, and that is why we have Bill C-22 now. Therefore, now that those consultations have been done, I urge that we pass the bill as fast as possible so we give the tools to law enforcement agencies. I also met with the commissioner, the deputy commissioner and the regional police chiefs of all the areas around my riding, and all of them have stated that we need lawful access and need it now.

Mr. Speaker, the threshold is to get subscriber information. The first step when someone gets a call or a threat is to find out who the number belongs to. It used to be very easy. We could pick up a phone book-like thing in the library that had every number in it. It used to be published every year. When somebody called, we could tell where the number came from. The world has changed drastically from that. We are now on VPNs. Even normal office phones are. Land lines do not actually communicate with a direct line. They go over the Internet. Getting the subscriber information is the first and fundamental step so law enforcement can take subsequent steps to get production orders to tap phones. Those would come after, but the initial step of finding out who is calling, where the information is coming from, is vital.

Mr. Speaker, that is a very valid question. It is a big concern. People facing extortion threats are wondering why it takes the police so long to find out who is responsible, when sometimes in the private sector they may be able to get a private investigation or a digital firm to find out where the call was coming from. Unfortunately, law enforcement has been handicapped without those capabilities. It has asked for the bill to pass immediately, as fast as possible, as the threat is really hindering people's lives. Normal business people are not able to go out. They live in fear. It is finally coming to fruition, and I am hopeful they will be able to live their lives in a peaceful manner.

Mr. Speaker, Canada's support for the people of Sudan has been unwavering since the beginning of the conflict. Last week, our government announced more than $120 million in new assistance to support the people of Sudan and others across the region. This is about getting life-saving support to those who need it most. It underscores Canada's commitment to addressing one of the world's worst humanitarian crises. The people of Sudan deserve protection, dignity and a path back to stability. Canada will continue to press for the conditions that make that possible.

Speaker, when I speak to British Columbians, including Rachel from my riding, they thank me for the Canada child benefit. Rachel also remembers that when the program was under the Conservatives, she had to pay taxes on it when it came to April. She also thanks me for the dental benefit that is helping her and her children get dental care. She is also looking forward to our affordability measure that is coming out for her groceries in June. In addition to that, the 10¢ tax relief at the gas pump is helpful. We are listening to Canadians, and they are getting what they need. The Conservatives are not listening to Canadians and should—

Mr. Speaker, the premier of the province, the mayor of Abbotsford and the police chief of Abbotsford have all said to please go across party lines to get Bill C-2, Bill C-12 and Bill C-14 passed. I used to think that maybe it is obstruction that Conservatives are doing, but I really think they do not even read the bills. If they read the bills, they would know that it would be very impactful to pass them, legislate them and get the tools to the police, who need them right away.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to speak about a matter that is of deep and pressing concern to my constituents in Surrey Centre, as well as to those living in the Lower Mainland region in my home province. The government's first priority is to protect Canadians and their communities. We are deeply concerned about the reports of people in B.C, in Ontario and across Canada who have been targeted by extortion, threats and violence. These types of crimes are insidious. They sow fear in our communities and prevent hard-working Canadians from running their businesses and sleeping soundly at night. This is why we are working with a wide range of stakeholders and law enforcement to ensure that we address these issues head-on. Our government has tabled over six major public safety and criminal justice bills, legislation that is specifically designed to crack down on violent and repeat offenders, strengthen sentencing and modernize Canada's Criminal Code. This is why I find it surprising that the Conservatives have chosen this as their motion for today. Rather than fast-tracking the legislation that premiers, law enforcement, municipalities, police chiefs and police associations across the country have all called on Parliament to pass urgently, the Conservatives constantly delay and obstruct the committee and the House. Bill C-2 and Bill C-12 will bolster Canada's law enforcement tool kit with critical assets, like lawful access, to combat transnational organized crime. For those who might not know what lawful access is, it is the ability to catch digital phone systems like WhatsApp and Signal and track them down to the subscriber. In fact, there is nothing in the Conservative motion today that has not already been addressed or tabled in the House, or that is not categorically false. Bill C-14, the bail and sentencing reform act, would bring in stricter bail laws to address violent and repeat offending and organized crime, and tougher sentencing laws for serious and violent crimes, including extortion. Combined, Bill C-2, Bill C-12 and Bill C-14 would crack down on intimidation and violence by using tools like lawful access, and reduce risks to victims and witnesses. In addition to this legislation, we have held summits on extortion in collaboration with the Government of British Columbia and the Government of Ontario. These summits were a strong, collaborative effort, bringing together federal and provincial governments, local law enforcement and the RCMP to advance a joint response to extortion cases. In fact, one of the few parties that have not been willing to collaborate is that of the sponsor of today's motion. Instead, they prefer to mislead Canadians by mis-characterizing our justice system. For instance, this motion calls to bar non-citizens convicted of serious crimes from making refugee claims. First of all, Canadians cannot make refugee claims, so it sounds pretty odd. Serious criminality is already grounds for inadmissibility for claims to the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada. Asylum claims do not and will not prevent criminals from being punished to the fullest extent of the law. The minute the CBSA suspects someone of serious criminality, like extortion or firearms offences, it suspends their refugee claim. Everyone other than the Conservatives knows a person cannot claim asylum if they are being investigated for serious criminality. While Conservatives continue to rely on slogans and ideological proposals, our government is delivering thoughtful, targeted reforms to strengthen public safety and protect Canadians. We have announced millions in funding through Canada's border plan for the creation of regional integrated drug enforcement teams, which will bring together law and border enforcement resources from multiple agencies and jurisdictions to fight organized drug crime and combat extortion. We have announced additional funding to help bolster the work of local law enforcement to combat extortion, support and provide services to victims and build on efforts already under way through local police task forces in Peel Region and in British Columbia. The CBSA is committed to supporting the task force through the removal of inadmissible foreign nationals involved in extortion and other serious criminal offences. Further, because we know that preventing crime in the long term means targeting its roots, we have allocated $390 million over five years to support provinces and territories with prevention programs and law enforcement activities through the initiative to take action against gun and gang violence. Our government is also providing $250 million through the building safer communities fund directly to municipalities and indigenous communities to bolster gang prevention programming and counter the social conditions that lead to criminality. These actions build on the national coordination and support team, which was established by the RCMP in February 2024 as a nationwide alliance supporting police and helping to coordinate and advance extortion investigations across Canada. Through the national coordination and support team, the RCMP is working with police departments across Canada and internationally to address extortion and violent incidences. In response to the call for more federal resources to address the extortion situation in Surrey, the RCMP is providing 20 additional federal officers and helicopter resources to strengthen local operational capacity. As I have made clear, we are collaborating across all levels of jurisdiction to combat extortion and help those who have been affected. We are also investing in an additional 1,000 new RCMP and 1,000 new CBSA personnel. This funding comes from budget 2025, which commits over $1.8 billion over four years to strengthen federal law enforcement. To ensure that members in our communities feel safe, we have introduced legislation; made significant federal investments in enhancing federal law enforcement capacity, directly supporting provincial and locally led efforts; and continued to meet with affected communities. We are using all our tools to crack down on crime and protect our communities. I would like to take this time to recognize the tireless work that our officers in the RCMP and CBSA do each and every day. If someone receives threats, we urge them not to comply with demands and to report the incident to their local police of jurisdiction. All of us have a right to live and work free of threats and intimidation. We will continue to work together with all levels of government and law enforcement to ensure that all Canadians have safe communities in which to live, work and raise their families.

Mr. Speaker, I was able to go to Winnipeg to speak to people who have been victims of extortion or who are getting threats. Let me be clear that, if Bill C-2 had passed, if we had legislation on lawful access, we would not have police and prosecution departments working four to six months to get production orders to find out the source of a threatening call. If we were prioritizing that rather than making slogans and having opposition day motions like we are today, we would have a tool the police could immediately use to find out, when someone gets a threatening extortion call, who is making that call. Then the next level of action could be taken to wiretap, surveil or do other things. When we have legislation that was created so far in the past that it predates cellphones, we need to modernize it to this date and time so we can capture those who are extorting our vulnerable citizens.

Mr. Speaker, the funny thing is that, in modernizing our legal system, most of the legislation we have had to deal with is because of the violations of the previous government. The Supreme Court gave ruling after ruling saying that all the legislation the Conservatives passed was invalid, was not just and does not comply with our charter. Over the last 10 years, we have been fixing all the Conservatives' errors. Crime is actually on the decline in Canada. I think major serious crime is on the decline. The Liberal government will continue to work hard to address the root causes and make Canada a safer, more compliant place, where our citizens can live freely, free of crime and free of threats of extortion.

Mr. Speaker, I think the delays, in the criminal aspect, have zero weight, because immediately upon the suspicion that someone is involved in criminal activity, the asylum proceedings suspend. The CBSA will not pursue those. The CBSA goes through the claimant's criminal actions, so it does not affect it. When it comes to anybody who has been living over a year in Canada, under the new bill, if it passes the Senate, comes back here and we expeditiously pass it, they would be ineligible for asylum. That would reduce the timelines in general, but when it comes to anybody involved in serious criminality, the asylum process would not be a hindrance to their criminal trial. It gets suspended. Once their sentencing is done, they would be deported as needed.

Mr. Speaker, I find it pretty amazing that legislators on the other side do not know the legislation that is already here. Nobody can claim asylum when they are charged. It gets suspended. They go to trial, they get sentenced and they get deported. They cannot claim asylum when they are charged. That was the law even before the legislation before the House, which is going to make it more restrictive and even more onerous for those who commit extortion.

Mr. Speaker, when I speak to the police chief in that jurisdiction, when I speak to the mayor in that jurisdiction and when I speak to the premier of that province, they ask, can I get the Conservatives to pass Bill C-2? Can I get lawful access passed? Can I get them to pass the bills in the House? They do not want this obstruction. I urge the Conservatives to support all this legislation so we can give the police the tools they need to prosecute, enforce the laws of this land and kick these extortionists out.

Mr. Speaker, this year's theme for International Development Week is “prosperity through partnership”. Canadians are strong when we work together and work with others. While our development efforts are grounded in fighting poverty and advancing inclusive growth, they can also lay the groundwork for long-term mutual prosperity. I saw this myself in Indonesia, where decades of development co-operation have helped cut poverty by half while paving the path to a new trade agreement that will benefit Canadians and Indonesians alike. This is how we create opportunity: by building prosperity through partnership.

Mr. Speaker, addressing the roots of conflict and instability abroad helps reduce the risks Canadians face here at home. Investing in development helps build stronger allies, new trading partners and new markets for Canadian businesses. Our government is making generational investments to strengthen the Canadian economy, help Canadians get ahead and build a more resilient future for our country. Our development efforts are a critical part of that by strengthening our international partnerships and supporting a more peaceful, stable and prosperous world.

Mr. Speaker, our hearts are with those affected by the devastating floods in Sri Lanka, which has declared a state of emergency. In times of crisis, Canadians step up. To support an urgent and immediate response, Canada is providing an initial $1 million in humanitarian aid to help the Red Cross, the Humanitarian Coalition and other partners deliver life-saving relief. This means emergency shelter, water, health services and other essentials to the most affected. This builds on support Canada has already provided to the World Food Programme's emergency response. We are closely following developments across the region and will continue to stand with communities facing these impacts.

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Honoré-Mercier. I appreciate the opportunity to rise to speak about this essential piece of legislation that would advance our government's plan to build Canada strong. We are living through a moment of profound global change. The systems that have long underpinned our prosperity are being challenged, and Canadians are feeling the effects of those pressures on their everyday lives. Responding to those challenges requires meeting the moment with clarity and purpose, and budget 2025 is our plan to transform our economy to one that is stronger, more self-sufficient and more resilient to global shocks. Our plan would build on Canada's strengths, world-class industries, skilled and talented workers, diverse trade partnerships and a strong domestic market where we can be our own best customers. Canada's new government is delivering an investment budget. We would spend less on government operations to invest more in workers, businesses and nation-building infrastructure that will grow our economy for the long term. At this time of intense global pressures, responsible leadership means focusing on what we can control, and budget 2025 reflects that reality. Every department has had to make disciplined and sometimes difficult decisions so that we can keep our investments targeted, effective and sustainable. In my portfolio, this means focusing resources where Canada's impact is greatest: modernizing our tool kit, deploying Canadian expertise and working through new partnerships and innovative approaches to maximize the impact of public dollars and deliver meaningful assistance to vulnerable communities around the world. Across government, the resources identified through budget 2025 are critical to the generational investments in housing, infrastructure, defence, productivity and competitiveness that Canada needs to safeguard its future in a rapidly changing world. These would enable $1 trillion in total investments over the next five years through our focused public spending and stronger capital investment. We are creating an economy by Canadians for Canadians and the budget implementation act is a key part of this work. From building more homes and expanding clean electricity to upgrading the infrastructure that growing communities rely on every day, this budget would deliver investments that will shape Canada's future for decades to come. For instance, the new building communities fund would support provinces, territories and municipalities as they strengthen the roads, water systems, transit and health facilities that underpin a strong economy. A dedicated $5-billion health infrastructure fund would help ensure hospitals, emergency rooms, urgent care centres and medical schools in communities like mine and across the country have the health infrastructure required to meet the needs of Canadians. I encourage provinces and territories to seize these opportunities to invest in the infrastructure essential to building the strong foundation our economy needs. However, building a strong foundation for our economy also requires a tax system that rewards investment, accelerates innovation and strengthens Canada's competitiveness. That is why the budget implementation act advances a focused tax strategy to supercharge productivity and attract new capital. It would introduce a productivity superdeduction, enhancing incentives that would allow businesses to immediately write off a larger share of new capital investments, helping them invest and grow. This would include the reinstated accelerated investment incentive and a 100% first-year writeoff for investments in manufacturing and processing equipment, clean energy technologies, zero-emission vehicles, productivity-enhancing assets, and scientific research and experimental development. Our government knows that innovation and scientific discovery are the foundation of long-term economic growth. Science fuels innovation and innovation fuels productivity, helping Canada stay competitive in a fast-changing global economy. That is why we would also strengthen the scientific research and experimental development tax incentive program by increasing expenditure limits, restoring the eligibility of SR and ED capital expenditures and expanding eligibility to more Canadian firms. All told, these additional government investments of $440 million on an ongoing basis are expected to generate near $1.2 billion in economic output each year, about a three-time return for Canada's economy. To provide certainty for business investment decisions, we are also proposing enhancements to existing investment tax credits to expand eligibility and extend the availability of select tax credits. This includes improving our suite of clean economy investment tax credits and expanding eligibility of the critical mineral exploration tax credit to include an additional 12 essential minerals. In addition to ensuring that Canada has the right incentives to attract investment and grow our economy, we need to ensure that we are not putting ourselves at a disadvantage. The budget implementation act also proposes to eliminate or modify tax measures that have proven to be inefficient, costly to administer and challenging for Canadian industries at a time of ongoing global economic uncertainty. To provide relief to the aviation and boating industries and to streamline the luxury tax framework, we are moving forward with ending the luxury tax on aircraft and vessels as of the day after budget day. To simplify Canada's tax system and reduce compliance costs for taxpayers and governments, and in light of existing measures like the federal foreign buyer ban and municipal and provincial vacant home taxes, we are moving forward with eliminating the underused housing tax as of the 2025 calendar year. The legislation being debated today is full of measures to drive growth, support workers and build a more resilient Canadian economy. It also includes measures that could help build more affordable homes, fight financial fraud and put more money in the pockets of Canadians. We are able to do all this by spending less on operations so that we can invest more in Canada, enabling the government to direct federal spending forward, enhancing productivity and strengthening capital formation, as reflected in many of the measures I have highlighted today. The budget positions our country for the long term. It invests in the homes, infrastructure and opportunities Canadians need, and it ensures that Canada remains a steady, reliable partner in an uncertain world. As we build a stronger and more resilient Canada, we will continue to stand for humanitarian leadership, for meaningful international partnerships and for a Canada that is secure at home and respected abroad. This legislation turns the ambitions of budget 2025 into concrete action, and I urge all members to support it so that Canadians can begin to reap the benefits of building Canada strong.

Mr. Speaker, I was fortunate to go to the World Bank meetings in Washington recently. If we compare Canada to the rest of the world, whether it is our G7 partners, the OECD or other like-minded countries, there is no country with a better financial track record than Canada's. We are one of only two countries in the world that have a AAA credit history with Moody's and S&P Global. We were mentioned by the IMF, which said we had the best framework, along with Germany. If we look at inflationary pressures, we were also one of the best countries at reducing inflationary pressures after the Ukraine war and the COVID-19 pandemic began.

Mr. Speaker, we are investing heavily in clean hydro and electricity. We are investing heavily in critical minerals, which are the lifeline of batteries and EVs and the future of this country and the planet. These are the types of lifetime investments we are doing to enable Canada not only to be a leader in our legislation to curb emissions, control emissions and bring us to a net-zero climate, but also to bring the ingredients, manufacturing capacity and industrial capacity to lead that charge and be the fastest-growing economy in the G7.

Mr. Speaker, for far too long, we have been reliant almost exclusively on one market, which is the United States. It has been a wake-up call. However, Canada has been very fortunate. In the last 10 years, we have done numerous trade deals, like the CPTPP, CETA with Europe, and those with several South American countries. We are the only G7 country with a free trade deal with every G7 country. In my role as Secretary of State for International Development, I get to go to many countries that are in the beginning steps of reaching free trade agreements or have just reached them. The opportunities are endless. I think Canada has to explore them, and Prime Minister Carney is leading a team and leading—

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is leading the charge with cabinet ministers and taking a team Canada approach with all these countries to expand our trade opportunities. This is to make the products that Canada needs to give to the rest of the world, and those that Canada needs to ensure we have sufficient, safe and reliable supply chains and have the ingredients to help build an affordable and industrious Canada.

Madam Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 83(1), on behalf of the Minister of Finance and National Revenue, I would like to table, in both official languages, a notice of a ways and means motion to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on November 4, 2025, and other measures. Pursuant to Standing Order 83(2), I ask that an order of the day be designated for consideration of this ways and means motion.

Madam Speaker, I am honoured to rise in the House today to speak in support of Bill C-14, the bail and sentencing reform act. This legislation represents a significant effort to strengthen public safety and ensure that Canada's justice system works as it should: firm, fair and focused on protecting people. In my riding of Surrey Centre, we have seen first-hand how crime can shake a community's sense of safety. I have spoken with families, business owners and community leaders who have been directly targeted by extortion and intimidation. Some have received threatening calls demanding money. Others have seen shots fired at their homes and businesses, or had their livelihoods put at risk because they refused to pay. Some may have even been murdered for failing to pay. These are not abstract crimes; they are real acts of fear and coercion that are leaving long-lasting damage. They rob people of their peace of mind and the freedom to live and work without intimidation, and they erode trust in the system when those responsible are seen walking the streets soon after being arrested. Canadians want communities to be safe. When those expectations are not met, they expect their government to respond. That is why this bill matters. The bail and sentencing reform act is about restoring confidence that our justice system will protect the innocent, support victims and hold offenders fully accountable. It is also about restoring confidence that the federal government is listening to the concerns of Canadians and responding with concrete action. Bill C-14 would introduce more than 80 clauses of targeted reforms to make bail laws stricter and sentencing tougher for repeat and violent offenders, while safeguarding the rights guaranteed under the charter. These proposed reforms reflect months of government consultation with provinces and territories, mayors, law enforcement, victims' advocates and community organizations, all united in the shared goal of keeping Canadians safe. While this bill covers a range of reforms, I want to focus my remarks in a few areas that matter deeply to me and to the people I represent, particularly those dealing with bail, violent crime and the growing problem of extortion and organized crime. I will talk first about Bill C-14's aim to strengthen the bail system. Across the country, too many tragic and violent crimes have been committed by individuals who were already out on bail. There is growing concern that the bail system is not working as it should when it comes to repeat and violent offenders. This bill aims to address that problem and make bail decisions more responsive to public safety. It would offer clarity to police and courts about how to apply the principle of restraint and would make clear that it does not require release in every case. Detention is justified when it is necessary to protect public safety. The legislation would also strengthen the guidance given to courts when assessing bail, ensuring that decisions take full account of risks to public safety and the circumstances of the alleged offence. Most importantly, Bill C-14 would introduce several new reverse onus provisions for crimes such as organized auto theft, home invasion, human trafficking, sexual assault involving choking or strangulation, and, critically, extortion involving violence. Typically, when prosecutors want to detain an accused person while they await trial, they bear the onus or burden of demonstrating to the court that the accused should not be released on bail. The reverse onus would shift this burden from the prosecution to the accused, creating a presumption in favour of keeping the accused in custody unless they can show to the court that they should not be denied bail. In other words, it would be up to the accused to demonstrate why they should be released and not the other way around. By shifting the burden in these cases, the law would help ensure that individuals who repeatedly endanger others remain in custody unless it is truly safe to release them. I will turn next to how this legislation would help address the growing threat of extortion and organized crime. In my riding of Surrey Centre, this issue is deeply personal. The Surrey Police Service has reported 65 extortion cases so far this year, with 35 of them involving gunfire. These numbers are alarming, and behind each one are people and families living in fear and uncertainty as a result. When fear like this takes hold, it can damage livelihoods and the sense of safety that communities deserve and depend on. For example, I have heard from business owners who feel targeted simply for working hard and succeeding. No one should ever have to look over their shoulder just for building a successful business. Bill C-14 would give our justice system stronger tools to respond, making it more difficult for an accused charged with extortion involving threatened or attempted violence to secure their release on bail. It would require the courts to consider the number of and seriousness of outstanding charges accumulated while out on bail, and it would expand weapons prohibitions at the bail stage to include those accused of extortion and organized crime. Importantly, it would also require courts to consider imposing tougher conditions like curfews, no-contact orders and clear geographic restrictions when bail is granted to help prevent further intimidation while cases are before the courts. These proposals would complement other actions to tackle organized crime and extortion, most notably the recent listing of the Bishnoi gang as a terrorist entity. This equips law enforcement and prosecutors with stronger tools to investigate, disrupt and dismantle transnational criminal networks that traffic in fear and violence. Together, these measures would help ensure that my constituents in Surrey Centre, and Canadians across the country, can live and work without fear or coercion. Canadians also expect that sentences will reflect the seriousness of the crime committed and the harm done to victims. I would like to highlight a few elements of this bill that would strengthen accountability once offenders are convicted. Bill C-14 would amend the Criminal Code to include significant sentencing reforms to make penalties tougher for repeat violent offenders, including extortion and crimes that endanger public safety. It would require consecutive sentences for certain combinations of offences, as when extortion is committed alongside arson or when a violent auto theft is linked with the breaking and entering of a home. Each act would be treated as a separate harm deserving of its own consequence. These measures would make sure sentences send a clear message: Those who commit acts of violence or intimidation will face consequences that reflect the seriousness of their crimes. Bill C-14 represents a balanced and responsive path forward. It is the product of co-operation across multiple levels of government, engagement with frontline responders and listening to the concerns of Canadians, and it reflects the federal government's commitment to doing its part. For those measures to have their full effect, they must be matched with strong implementation at every level, from the provincial administration of justice to local law enforcement in communities across the country. Keeping Canadians safe requires all partners to work together to uphold their shared responsibilities. In my riding of Surrey Centre and across the country, families, small business owners and community leaders have been clear that they want safer streets, stronger accountability and real consequences for those who commit violent crimes. This bill would help deliver exactly that. I urge members to give it their full support.

Madam Speaker, I share a lot of the same concerns as my hon. colleague, whose riding is adjacent to mine. Yes, there is a lot of concern among business owners and families, but the bill that the member opposite is speaking about was more about slogans. It was not charter-compliant and did not have the consultation of the provinces and territories, the attorneys general, the solicitors general, the municipal police forces, victims or the average Canadians and business owners who are reporting these crimes. Bill C-14 was done with the consultation of municipal police forces, the provinces and territories, solicitors general, attorneys general and members of the public. This is a charter-compliant, victim-focused bill, and that is why we are supporting it.

Madam Speaker, this concept of restraint came from a Supreme Court ruling in 2017 showing why it should be done. What I have seen is that the concept of restraint has not been equally implemented across Canada. Take, for example, the extortion cases I have seen. I have met victims of extortion in Ontario and Alberta as well as British Columbia. The same bail provisions via the Criminal Code are implemented in all three jurisdictions. However, I would commend the training and ability of the Alberta prosecution in terms of any of those. Nine were charged with extortion there, and nine never received bail. Out of the nine, six have been convicted and three are awaiting trial and sentencing. However, in other jurisdictions, the same restraint was not implemented in the same, effective way. I think clarity on restraint is very important. We need to have it. It is asked for by the Supreme Court of Canada. However, how that restraint is implemented requires proper training for our prosecution offices, as well as training for those judges.

Madam Speaker, it is imperative that all three levels do. We have to remember that, in Canada, it is the local, municipally governed police or the RCMP in that jurisdiction that have to do the investigation and catch the culprits. It is the provinces that have to press the charges and control the prosecution. They must make their efforts and we must make the laws. We are doing our part. We ask that the provinces and municipalities do theirs.

Mr. Speaker, hurricane Melissa has left heartbreaking devastation in its wake. We stand with the people of the Caribbean in this moment of crisis. Last week, we announced $7 million in emergency relief, allowing partners to scale up the delivery of food, water, health services and other essential aid. This builds on long-standing work to strengthen disaster preparedness in the Caribbean and support for the United Nations Central Emergency Response Fund, which released an additional $8 million in assistance. This weekend a Canadian team was on the ground in the Caribbean and assessing what more Canada can do.

Mr. Speaker, Canada has built a strong and enduring reputation as a trusted partner in international development. For over 50 years, we have fought poverty, hunger and disease, and we have been a consistent champion for human rights, dignity and equality. At the UN General Assembly, one thing that stood out loud and clear was the deep trust our allies and partners place in our country as one that always stands ready to support shared action on global challenges. At a time when the rules-based order is coming under strain, many are looking to Canada as a clear voice for shared progress and co-operation.