Bill C-5 (Historical)

An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act

This enactment amends the Criminal Code and the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act to, among other things, repeal certain mandatory minimum penalties, allow for a greater use of conditional sentences and establish diversion measures for simple drug possession offences.

Public Safety

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Riding Mountain, MB]

Mr. Speaker, it is always an honour to present a petition on behalf of the people of Riding Mountain.

The people of Swan River are experiencing an alarming increase in violent crime, which has threatened the safety and well-being of families across our region. A recent report by the Manitoba west district RCMP found that over an 18-month period, four offenders in Swan River were responsible for 239 offences.

The petitioners continue to suffer the consequences of soft-on-crime Liberal policies like Bill C-5, which repealed mandatory jail time for serious crimes, and Bill C-75, which forces judges to release repeat violent offenders right back onto the streets. The petitioners of Swan Valley want to see an end to the Liberals' reckless catch-and-release policies so that criminals can stay behind bars. That is why the people of Swan River are demanding jail, not bail, for violent repeat offenders.

I support the good people of Swan River.

[Dean Allison, Conservative, Niagara West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals have unleashed a crime wave in Niagara like we have never seen before. It has gotten so bad that the Niagara Regional Police Service is reminding people to do a nighttime routine. They call it the 9 p.m. routine: “It’s 9pm, Niagara. Have you completed your #9pmRoutine? Ensure all your valuables are secure, cars, doors and windows are locked, and alarms are activated if you have them.”

This falls on the heels of Toronto police and York police telling people to leave their keys by the front door and lock themselves in the closet while criminals steal from their home. The only thing they did not say was to leave a full tank of gas, and cookies at the door.

This is happening as Liberals keep telling Canadians, “You've never had it so good.” Let me remind folks of the Liberal record. Liberal Bill C-5 eliminated mandatory minimum sentences for serious violent crimes. Bill C-75 requires judges to release accused offenders at the earliest possible opportunity and under the least onerous conditions.

Canadians live in fear as criminals roam the streets knowing they can do whatever they want to whomever they want and still be out on bail before the ink on their paperwork is even dry.

Military Justice System Modernization Act

[Connie Cody, Conservative, Cambridge, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I volunteered at the Cambridge Legion for several years, and I am always proud to support our veterans and those serving in our armed forces. We all know that veterans put so much on the line for our country, and all they want is support from our government, but the Liberals have passed legislation like Bill C-5, allowing criminals convicted of sexual assault to serve their sentences at home. In a military context, that could mean that right around the corner from their attacker on a small base, some could still reside.

Does the minister agree that we should repeal Bill C-5, stop soft-on-crime policies and protect not only CAF victims but all victims of sexual misconduct?

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

Mr. Speaker, Bill C-75 reduced the conditions on the principle of restraint, allowing those who commit sexual offences to be released on bail very easily. It allows them to be repeat offenders. That will now permeate the Canadian Armed Forces, as well, because of the soft-on-crime approach taken by the Liberals. With Bill C-5, they got rid of a lot of the mandatory minimums so that repeat sexual offenders can now serve their sentences at home. That includes sexual assault, sexual exploitation and sexual interference.

What is the purpose if those who are committing these crimes are allowed to continue to serve in the Canadian Forces at their leisure?

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

Mr. Speaker, as the shadow minister for national defence, I am always honoured to stand in this place to talk about the great work of the brave women and men who serve in the Canadian Armed Forces and how we can do more to support them, which is what Bill C-11 is trying to do.

The first responsibility of the federal government is to protect Canada, protect our citizens, as well as to protect those who serve us. There has been a rapid escalation of threats, and what we are facing in Canada is continuing to evolve. There is Russia's illegal invasion of Ukraine. There is the ongoing conflict we are seeing with Hamas first attacking Israel and now Israel's clearing operation to neutralize the terrorists in the Gaza Strip. There is the ongoing escalation we are experiencing in the South China Sea and the Taiwan Strait as the People's Liberation Army Navy of China continues to escalate in that region, using air power, as well as resources and its coast guard to exercise its power in the region but ignoring international rules such as UNCLOS, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.

Those hostile powers want our resources, whether in the Arctic or our maritime domain, and they want to be within striking distance of our continent. We have to do more to protect ourselves here and invest in our military. This means supporting those who serve us. As Conservatives, we take our national security very seriously and want to make sure we always put that first and foremost. This is why we have to invest in the people, in their kit and in the training they need to undertake to deal with the hybrid warfare, the asymmetrical warfare, we are experiencing around the world.

First and foremost, Conservatives have always said and believed that those who serve, who proudly put on the uniform, are the best of the best Canada has to offer. They deserve to have a respectful workplace that is free of discrimination, racism, sexual misconduct, and abuse of authority and position. All members deserve to be respected. We also believe that the victims, those who are dealing with military sexual trauma, deserve justice. We hope this is going to culminate in the move from the military justice system to the civilian system, if the capacity is there and it would actually result in prosecutions and true justice for the victims of sexual trauma in the military.

It has been years: The Liberal government has been in power for 10 years. There have actually been three reports done. The first report came out in 2015, and it is interesting to note that the only time the current Minister of National Defence and I have had an interchange in the House on military sexual misconduct was when he was a member of the third party and the Liberals were sitting way down in that far corner. I was the parliamentary secretary for defence, and he asked a question about what steps we were taking. At that time, we had initiated the Madam Justice Deschamps report, and Justice Deschamps had made 10 recommendations.

Then of course there was an election, and that report sat on the corner of the desk of both former chief of the defence staff Jon Vance and former minister of defence Harjit Sajjan and collected dust. They did nothing during that time. There was then the Jon Vance scandal and all of that, and I will talk about that a bit later.

We know that through the process, the Liberals finally took action. There was the Arbour report and now the Fish report, which brought about some of the things that would happen with Bill C-11. However, it has taken 10 years to get to where we are today. For 10 long years, the Liberals sat on their hands and did nothing to actually change the National Defence Act and the military justice system under it.

When we look at Bill C-11, we are concerned that it would potentially open the door for more political interference. There would be an opportunity for partisan-style appointments, such as the Liberals' giving more power to the minister of national defence to issue guidelines with respect to prosecutions. That would not happen in the normal system in Canada because it would be considered political interference. The Liberals would also be changing the appointment process in that the director of military prosecutions, the director of defence counsel services and the provost marshal are all now going to be appointed by the Governor in Council rather than the minister. We know that when things go into the PMO and into cabinet, things become quite political and partisan.

Conservatives will continue to support those in the armed forces, and we are going to make sure that we are carefully studying Bill C-11 to ensure that concerns from all stakeholders, including those in the military justice system, those in the defence industry and, especially, those who have served in the Canadian Armed Forces, as well as victims' rights groups, and that their voices are heard when we study this at committee.

As I said earlier, Bill C-11 is the former Bill C-66, with minor tweaks in language, translations and interpretation of certain clauses: 6, 67 and 68. It would amend the National Defence Act to transfer jurisdiction of most offences of a sexual nature from the military justice system to civilian authorities, including the courts, municipal police, provincial police and the RCMP. This would depend on the jurisdiction in which the offence takes place, with the exception of a sexual offence that takes place outside Canada when troops are deployed. In that case, those who are deployed would have access to the current regulations under the military justice system and the National Defence Act, and military police and the JAG, the judge advocate general's office, would still undertake those investigations with the national investigative service.

We know that section 273 of the National Defence Act provides for that. It has provided for the way that this has been dealt with historically, but there is concern about whether the civilian courts would have the capacity to take on extra cases in those jurisdictions, from the standpoint of both the court level and the police level. What are they going to do with historic cases? We already know of historic cases that have been transferred into the civilian court system that have not resulted in convictions. Instead, we have seen high-level flag officers and general officers who were found innocent or had their proceedings stayed; we have seen cases that the Crown rejected because of the way the evidence was collected by the military police and the national investigative service of the Canadian Armed Forces. We question whether that provides the justice that the victims were looking for. We definitely want to make sure that all are given a fair trial and that we support those who were erroneously charged in the first place.

What are we doing about the issue of capacity, as was previously asked by my colleague, within the military police and national investigative service when they have to do investigations outside Canada? How do they coordinate with provincial, municipal and RCMP police agencies when we are talking about things that happened on base and will require investigations done by local authorities?

Bill C-11 seeks to increase the independence within the military, one of the recommendations coming from Madam Arbour and Justice Fish, so we would avoid a situation like what happened with Jon Vance. Because he was chief of the defence staff and everybody reported to him, nobody was prepared to take on that investigation and prosecute, including the then minister of national defence, who actually had authority over the chief of the defence staff. Harjit Sajjan refused to accept evidence and walked away.

We know there are questions about how this would all work. The provost marshal, who has traditionally been a colonel, would be made a general, so we are seeing a creep of the number of flag officers again.

Conservatives question the term limits. There is an inconsistency here on how people are being appointed, now being done through order in council in the Prime Minister's Office, and we know there is going to be the ongoing issue of the length of terms: Some are for four years; some are going to be eligible for reappointment whereas some are not. Some are for seven years, and some are for 10 years. It just gets a little confusing in terms of how this is all going to work.

When we talk about the provost marshal general, the director of military prosecutions and the director of defence counsel services, we just want to make sure there is a criterion as to what we want to see for qualifications for service in positions that normally would have reported to the vice-chief of the defence staff and/or the judge advocate general. Those things are going to give these guys their independence, so they report straight to the minister and to the government. There are questions about chain of command and how that is going to work. However, these are things we can look at in committee. The same is true for the director of defence counsel services.

Consistency is important here. Qualifications are important in these appointments. We want to make sure the partisanship that happens within the Prime Minister's Office does not percolate into the Canadian Armed Forces through those who serve the forces.

The minister talked about trust. As I suggested in my question for him, Liberals cannot be trusted, especially when it comes to talking about bad political appointments. If we look at 2022, the Liberals appointed Laith Marouf to do a project. It turned out he was an anti-Semite, but they were supposed to be working on diversity. The Liberals appointed Martine Richard as the Ethics Commissioner. She had to drop out because she was related to one of the cabinet ministers, who currently sits today. It was a complete conflict of interest. They appointed Birju Dattani as the human rights commissioner; he turned out to be anti-Semitic. Of course, it was another terrible appointment by the Liberals.

Justin Trudeau completely ignored the Ethics Commissioner's warning about appointing Annette Verschuren as the head of the green slush fund. This resulted in a huge scandal of over $2.1 billion that she and her cohorts were able to take from that Liberal slush fund and stuff into their own pockets. We should not forget the current Prime Minister recently appointed Doug Guzman as CEO to the defence investment agency. It turns out Doug Guzman is a former banking buddy of the Prime Minister's from Goldman Sachs.

I do not know if we need to have these close personal friends and partisan Liberal bagmen actually getting these types of appointments. I would hate to see this being the case when we look at appointments within the national defence apparatus, when we look at those who are going to be in charge of our military justice system. That would not be fair.

The Liberals also cannot be trusted when it comes to criminal justice. They have been soft on crime right from the beginning. Bill C-75 brought in the whole principle of restraint, which puts the least onerous conditions on those who are seeking bail. This is where we get bail, not jail and repeat violent offenders going back on the street. Now, potentially, those who are committing sexual assaults within the Canadian Armed Forces will have access to that same lax and soft-on-crime approach the Liberals have implemented.

Bill C-5 is another reason we should not trust the Liberals when it comes to reforming the military justice system. The bill reformed the criminal justice system by repealing mandatory jail time and allowing very serious violent offenders to serve their sentences at home. This includes getting house arrest, not jail time, if they commit sexual assault, sexual interference or sexual exploitation. Those conditions are now going to be transferred from the military justice system, or the Department of National Defence and Canadian Armed Forces, to the civilian system, which the Liberals have almost completely destroyed.

As I mentioned earlier, we cannot trust the Liberals when it comes to dealing with sexual assault in the Canadian Armed Forces; our members know that. Again, it has been 10 years since Madam Justice Deschamps brought forward her recommendations in her report, and they did nothing, which could have stymied this whole problem.

Take Jon Vance, who was CDS at the time. He started up, after the Liberals formed government, Operation Honour, which turned into a complete fiasco and did nothing to support victims, did nothing to stop sexual misconduct within the Canadian Armed Forces and did not live up to the code of service discipline and the ethics that those who serve should be living up to.

As I said, we know that Minister Sajjan, at that time in 2018, refused the evidence of the sexual misconduct charge against Jon Vance. We know there are memos that went back and forth between the minister's office and the Prime Minister's Office on how they could cover this up to protect Jonathan Vance and, later, also protect Minister Sajjan for not acting upon evidence that was given to somebody who reported directly to him.

Gary Walbourne, who was the Department of National Defence and Canadian Armed Forces ombudsman at the time, tried to provide that evidence and was pushed away. He was completely in the right because the only person who could deal with it in the chain of command was the Minister of National Defence. We know this went back and forth. We did an in-depth study of this in the Standing Committee on National Defence. I was vice-chair at the time, as I am vice-chair right now.

That was covered up by the Prime Minister's Office through Justin Trudeau, Katie Telford and Zita Astravas. They continued to cover up that sexual misconduct and protect the minister and Jon Vance, which is beyond me. At the end of the day, when it came to charging him and prosecuting within the civilian court, the government accepted the lesser charge of obstruction of justice. It never prosecuted on sexual misconduct and sexual assault. That, again, does not live up to victims' rights in any way, shape or form. The victims of Jon Vance still feel that they were never properly served or got the justice they deserved.

This went on. The defence committee was suspended for months on end. The chair of the committee, Karen McCrimmon, refused to hear testimony and motions. She kept suspending meetings. We were in the same meeting for three months and could not do our work as the defence committee, and we could not do our work as parliamentarians. I firmly believe that our privileges as parliamentarians were violated through that process.

We did find out, through that study, that the Privy Council Office, the Prime Minister's Office, former prime minister Justin Trudeau and Katie Telford were all aware of this over the entire three-year investigation.

To make things even worse, at the end of the day, even though Harjit Sajjan, the minister of defence at the time, knew about the sexual misconduct and the gravity of the problem that was happening within the Canadian Armed Forces, the government still gave Jon Vance a raise as the chief of the defence staff. That, I think, was just adding insult to injury.

We know that when it comes to political interference, the Liberals cannot be trusted. We can look at the ongoing F-35 debacle and how they continue to politicize the procurement. Our Royal Canadian Air Force and our Canadian Armed Forces right up to the chief of the defence staff today have all said that this is the jet they need and that we should buy more of them. Of course, the Liberals continue to play political football and kick the can and delay that procurement, which is only undermining the ability of the Royal Canadian Air Force to protect us here at home and work alongside our allies.

We know about things like cash for access and the wealthy Chinese billionaires that Justin Trudeau was involved with. We know they tried to cover up the expensive holiday that the former prime minister took on his private island. The ethics commissioners found multiple breaches. We know about the witch hunt that went after former vice-admiral Mark Norman back in 2018, which was politically motivated.

We cannot trust the Liberals. They have failed our Canadian Armed Forces. They have failed our brave women and men. Our warships continue to rust out. Our jets are worn out. The army has been hollowed out and our troops no longer feel like they are respected and honoured by the government.

When we really dig in and look at Liberal policies, it is a book of empty promises, like the 2017 defence policy and the defence policy update, which are all irrelevant. The government has allowed money to lapse. Because of this lack of respect for our forces, we have a recruitment problem. We are short over 13,000 troops today. Over 10,000 are undertrained and undeployable. Our forces are short 6,700 houses.

Conservatives will rectify all the mismanagement and wrongs of the Liberal government and serve our Canadian Armed Forces.

Public Safety

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Riding Mountain, MB]

Mr. Speaker, it is a privilege to present a petition on behalf on the constituents of Riding Mountain.

The people of Swan River are experiencing an alarming increase in violent crime, which has threatened the safety and well-being of families across our region. A recent report by the Manitoba west district RCMP found that over an 18-month period, four offenders in Swan River were responsible for 239 offences.

The petitioners continue to suffer the consequences of soft-on-crime Liberal policies like Bill C-5, which repealed mandatory jail time for serious crimes, and Bill C-75, which forces judges to release violent repeat offenders right back onto the streets. The petitioners in the Swan Valley want to see the end to the Liberals' reckless catch-and-release policies so that criminals can stay behind bars. That is why the people of Swan River are demanding jail, not bail, for violent repeat offenders.

I support the good people of Swan River.

Opposition Motion—Passage of Bill C-242

[John-Paul Danko, Liberal, Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON]

Mr. Speaker, after reflecting on the British Columbia example of decriminalizing illegal drugs, I completely agree that it was a terrible policy decision. We have seen the fallout in municipalities across Canada, including in Hamilton.

Bill C-5 is obviously problematic. Some of the sentencing restrictions on police when they are policing illegal drugs are problematic. Our government is committed to fixing what needs to be fixed.

[Brad Vis, Conservative, Mission—Matsqui—Abbotsford, BC]

Mr. Speaker, can the member acknowledge that when the Liberals changed Bill C-5 and Bill C-75, there was an increase in crime across our country? Will the member acknowledge that the action taken by the government, specifically in my province of British Columbia, to decriminalize hard drugs was one of the worst policy failures in the history of Canada?

[Michael Guglielmin, Conservative, Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON]

Mr. Speaker, imagine for a moment a father sleeping peacefully at home with his wife and kids, when violent thugs kick in their door and break into their home. He does what any husband would do: He tries to protect his family. Then he is fatally shot and murdered. This is not a scene from a Hollywood production; this was the reality for Aleem Farooqi and his family in Vaughan when Aleem was gunned down defending his family, a true hero.

Imagine someone waking up in the morning in their home to find out that their car in the driveway, right below where their children sleep, was almost stolen the night before. That is what happened to me back in August of this year, and I am not special. This has happened to numerous people in Vaughan—Woodbridge and thousands of Canadians all across this country. In my community, everybody knows someone who has had a car stolen. In fact, in the last eight weeks, York Region has seen 296 vehicle thefts. How about gun violence? In the last eight weeks, we have had 10 shootings and a bank robbery.

Last month, I attended a press conference in Vaughan—Woodbridge, joined by the Leader of the Opposition, fellow Conservative members of Parliament and victims of crime, and we attempted to address this very issue. The message was clear. Something needs to be done. Something needs to change in this country.

For far too long now, I have heard horror stories in my community of citizens being terrorized, their homes being broken into, their cars getting broken into and their loved ones being fatally shot. People are genuinely afraid. They are afraid in their own homes and afraid in their own communities.

I was born and raised in Vaughan—Woodbridge, a place that has always been to me the perfect place to raise a family. In my youth and early adult life, it was a community where I felt safe, where people would walk around at night without fear. They would not worry if they had forgotten to lock their doors, and they would go to bed knowing they were safe in their own beds. However, over the last decade, that sense of security has been shattered.

My friends in my community no longer feel safe walking at night. When our youth go to school, they face threats of gun violence, stabbings and assaults. Our seniors are anxious, wondering if their cars will be on the driveway when they wake up in the morning. Just last Wednesday, two homes fell prey to shootings. The shootings happened only minutes apart, and both of these homes had been shot earlier the same month. That means the residents have now lived twice through violent attacks. Recently in Vaughan, three suspects were arrested for committing a series of home invasions, and two of these suspects were already out on bail.

What happened? The Liberals introduced bail reform with Bill C-5 and Bill C-75, and these Liberal bail laws have completely broken our bail system.

What needs to change? Today, this is exactly what we are here to address. This is far from a partisan issue. Premiers, mayors, police associations, attorneys general and Canadians have been asking for the federal government to end catch-and-release bail laws like Bill C-75, a law that forces judges to apply the principle of restraint, which puts repeat violent offenders back on the streets, and Bill C-5, which repealed mandatory jail time for serious gun crimes, including extortion with a firearm.

We all know the consequences. Since these laws were introduced, all across Canada, violent crime is up by 55%, firearm crime is up by 130%, extortion has skyrocketed by 330%, sexual assaults are up by 76% and homicides are up by 29%. In 2019, David Lametti, now the Prime Minister's right-hand man, passed Bill C-75, forcing judges to release offenders at the earliest opportunity under the least onerous conditions.

Today, the Conservatives have introduced a motion in the House of Commons. For people tuning in from my community, the motion reads as follows:

That, given that,

(a) violent crime is up 55% under the Liberal government and repeat offenders continue to be released because of Liberal catch and release laws; and

(b) the Liberal government promised to pass criminal justice reform six months ago but has failed to do so;

in order to keep repeat offenders in jail and keep Canadians safe, the House is of the opinion that Bill C-242, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Department of Justice Act, also known as the Jail Not Bail Act, must pass and is committed to sitting extended hours, holding an expeditious committee study and undertaking such other procedural measures as may be necessary to pass it at the earliest opportunity.

The Conservatives are here to say that in order to stop this chaos on our streets, keep repeat violent offenders in jail and keep Canadians safe, we must pass my hon. colleague from Oxford's bill, the jail not bail act, Bill C-242.

What would the jail not bail act do? First, it would repeal the Liberal principle of restraint and replace it with a directive that the primary consideration is the protection and safety of the public. Second, it would introduce a new major offence category with reverse onus bail conditions for firearm, sexual assault, kidnapping, human trafficking, home invasion, robbery, extortion, arson and assault charges. Third, it would strengthen bail laws by mandating judges to consider an accused's full criminal history and would prevent anyone from getting bail who was convicted of a major offence in the last 10 years and is charged with a major offence while out on bail. Fourth, it would prohibit anybody with an indictable conviction from acting as a guarantor, would require judges to enforce bail conditions on guarantors and would require non-residents to surrender their passport upon request.

Do not take our word for it. Take it from Cait Alexander, a survivor of domestic violence who runs the organization End Violence Everywhere: “The Jail Not Bail Act is therefore more than legislation—it is an essential corrective—a lifeline capable of disrupting the revolving door of abuse and saving innocent lives.”

How about the Toronto Police Association? It stated:

The proposed ideas will put victims and communities first, restoring the balance that is desperately needed at a time when youth violence and gun crimes are out of control and innocent victims are paying the ultimate price. We would encourage all levels of government to set aside their political differences and do what's right.

After the horrific murder of Aleem Farooqi in my community of Vaughan, Vaughan's mayor, Steven Del Duca, called on the federal government for urgent bail system reform, stating, “I am calling on the Prime Minister to show leadership and to urgently overhaul the system”.

I will repeat that this is not a partisan issue. People's lives are at risk every single day the government delays. the Prime Minister and Minister of Justice have spent the last six months spiralling, dithering and failing to act. In that time, violent crime has surged and innocent Canadians have paid the ultimate price.

I have heard Liberal members say they are going to introduce stronger bail laws, except they have not, even though we know what is needed because we have heard it from every single corner of this country. What we do not need is more Liberal reforms. We need to scrap Liberal bail and restore safety on our streets.

If the Prime Minister and Liberal members of the House are serious about restoring peace to our communities, they will back this bill, reverse their disastrous bail laws and tip the scales of justice back in favour of innocent Canadians. If they do not want to support the bill for political purposes, they can abstain and let it pass so people in this country can have a sense of security again.

Every day, Canadians wake up and see another headline about a violent shooting. Tomorrow, many Canadians will wake up and their car will be stolen from their driveway. We have a job to do on behalf of the people who sent us here.

The government's primary responsibility is to keep Canadians safe. It is time to put victims ahead of criminals and violent criminals behind bars, where they belong. That is why I encourage every member of this House to support my colleague's bill, Bill C-242, the jail not bail act. It is very important that we stand up for our communities and the people of this country and put repeat violent offenders behind bars.

[Vincent Ho, Conservative, Richmond Hill South, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the answer is in the question. It is because the Liberals broke our justice system with Bill C-5 and Bill C-75, making house arrest the new norm and bringing in the revolving door justice system that we have now. They broke our justice system. Their bail reform is what caused this catch-and-release system, which has allowed crime to ravage our communities.

We are asking why the Liberals will not scrap Liberal bail.

Business of the House

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Grande Prairie, AB]

Mr. Speaker, it is time for the Thursday question, when we ask for the government's agenda for the upcoming week.

During the election, the Prime Minister made a lot of promises. He said that he was going to fix Liberal bail. Specifically, he was going to fix the mess that Justin Trudeau, as well as the vast majority of the Liberals, created by passing Bill C-5 and Bill C-75.

Would the House leader inform the House if the Liberals will finally bring in legislation, in the upcoming week, to fix the disaster they have created in the bail system in this country?

During the election, the Prime Minister promised that, by July 21 of this year, months ago, he would have a deal with Trump regarding our trade deal with the United States. Over the last number of weeks, we have reports that we have the fastest-shrinking economy in the G7. We have the second-highest unemployment rate in the G7. The jobs crisis is worsening in this country. We have seen the announcements from Imperial Oil of 900 job losses in Calgary. We have had the Kap Paper announcement here in Ontario, as well as GM's announcement that it is going to discontinue production of some of its models in Canada and move those jobs to the United States.

Will the House leader finally update the House as to whether the Prime Minister will fulfill his commitment to get a deal with the United States in the coming week?

Justice

[Michael Guglielmin, Conservative, Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the only thing the Liberals seem to do with any speed around here is to manufacture excuses for their inaction. Meanwhile, in the last eight weeks, York Region has seen 914 assaults, 296 vehicle thefts and 174 break and enters.

We know what to do. Mayors, police chiefs and Canadians all across this country have been calling on the Liberal government to scrap its failed bail laws, Bill C-5 and Bill C-75.

Canadians are watching. Will the Prime Minister do the right thing and scrap Liberal bail laws or get out of the way so Conservatives can do it for them?

Opposition Motion—Passage of Bill C-242

[Vincent Ho, Conservative, Richmond Hill South, ON]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians feel betrayed, stabbed in the back, both literally and metaphorically. Every day, the people of Richmond Hill South and families across Canada watch as violent offenders are being arrested in the morning and then let back out on our streets before nightfall, due to a decade of Liberal soft-on-crime laws. Seniors are afraid to walk to the grocery store. Parents are terrified to let their kids take the bus after dark. Who do we have to thank? The pro-crime Liberals, who have intentionally put the rights of repeat violent offenders ahead of the rights of law-abiding Canadians.

The Conservative jail not bail act is about one thing: standing with Canadians, not felons; standing with victims, not criminals; and standing with Canadians, not the pro-crime Liberals and their revolving door of a justice system that created the crime crisis. That is why Canadians from all walks of life agree that it is time to scrap Liberal bail.

Richmond Hill is under siege. Just weeks ago, gunfire ripped through a quiet Richmond Hill neighbourhood. A man was killed by an illegal gun, execution style, in the middle of a street in broad daylight. Parents dragged their children inside. Families huddled in fear. This is the question that echoed: Why is this happening in our once safe neighbourhood? Gangs are shooting up peaceful neighbourhoods and robbing homes, and this is often done by repeat offenders who are recommitting after being released, because of lax Liberal bail.

At Highway 7 and Leslie, someone was carjacked at gunpoint, Grand Theft Auto style. People were robbed in broad daylight at Major Mackenzie and Bayview. Places of worship were attacked by acts of hate on 16th Avenue and Bathurst. In the Hillcrest mall, robberies by repeat offenders, which have caused lockdowns, have seniors and shoppers scared to go out anymore. People are losing family members because of intentional acts of arson by criminals who are lighting up innocent people in their own homes at night, right in Richmond Hill. These are not just statistics. This is real people, real fear and real victims. Every single one of these tragedies was enabled by the pro-crime Liberal laws that keep criminals on the streets instead of behind bars. That is why it is high time to scrap Liberal bail.

The numbers do not lie and the human stories are heartbreaking, but the numbers confirm it. After 10 years of Liberal pro-crime laws, violent crime is up 55%, gun crime has more than doubled, extortion is up 330%, homicides are up 29%, sexual assaults are up 76%, and auto theft in the GTA is at levels never seen before. This did not happen by accident, but by design, because the pro-crime Liberals passed Bill C-5 and Bill C-75.

Mandatory prison time was abolished for dozens of charges, and house arrest became the new norm. The Liberal catch-and-release came into effect, and the Liberal pro-crime revolving door in the justice system was set into motion. The Liberals handcuffed the police and set the criminals free. The result is that the people of Richmond Hill South, and Canadians across the country, live in fear while the Prime Minister shrugs and the minister of injustice makes jokes about the Wild West. That is not leadership; that is negligence. It is disgraceful. The only way to put an end to this and bring home safe streets again is by scrapping Liberal bail.

Let us talk about the real cost of this Liberal failure. The cost is paid by Canadians, by blood, trauma and the loss of loved ones. In Richmond Hill, seniors tell me they will not walk through the mall or go to the park anymore. It is no longer safe. Parents living near Yonge Street say that their children cannot take public transit after dark. Teens cannot ride their bikes anymore because criminals are preying on their bikes and their lives. Shopkeepers on Highway 7 do not even bother reporting theft because the same thief is back the next day thanks to the pro-crime Liberals and their lax bail laws.

What about the police officers who risk their lives arresting violent offenders only to see them walk free before their shift is even over. It has gotten so bad that the York Regional Police chief is asking victims of crime to simply comply with the demands of criminals who the Liberal injustice system has let out. That is not justice; it is betrayal. They have been straight-up stabbed in the back. That is the legacy of 10 years of the pro-crime Liberals. The only way to bring justice to the victims and families is by scrapping Liberal bail.

The Conservative jail not bail act would bring back sanity, common sense and peace of mind. It would lock up repeat violent offenders and slam the door on gang members. It would ensure that gun criminals, who are often using illegally obtained guns, stay behind bars where they belong. It would also force judges to finally put public safety first, not Liberal ideology.

First, this legislation would repeal the Liberal principle of restraint and put public protection first instead of the criminal. This would ensure that communities are not left at the mercy of the pro-crime Liberals after all they have endured with a decade of the Liberals' soft-on-crime approach.

Second, it would introduce a new major offences category, which would reverse the onus on bail conditions for crimes involving firearms, sexual assault, kidnapping, human trafficking, home invasion, robbery, extortion, arson and assault. It would require the accused to prove why they should be let out on bail. This would stop career criminals unleashed by the Liberal crime wave from taking advantage of this broken Liberal injustice system.

Next, it would mandate judges to consider the full criminal history of the accused and prevent anyone convicted of a major offence while on bail in the last 10 years from receiving bail, thus ending the Liberals' revolving door injustice system.

Lastly, this legislation would prohibit anyone with an indictable conviction from acting as a guarantor and would require non-residents to surrender their passports upon request.

Conservatives stand with victims, families and Canadians. That is the choice before the House. Will parliamentarians from all parties, and Liberals alike, come together and vote to scrap Liberal bail?

Let us call this what it is: a pro-crime Liberal record. Liberal pro-crime Bill C-5 scrapped jail time for violent crimes involving weapons and allowed for house arrest instead of mandatory prison time for serious offences and a dozen other charges. Liberal pro-crime Bill C-75 lowered the bar so that repeat offenders could walk free and tied the hands of provincial governments, judges and police.

What did Canadians and the people of Richmond Hill get in return? They received more Liberal-sponsored gang shootings, more Liberal-sponsored carjackings, more Liberal-sponsored home invasions and more victims.

The pro-crime Liberals talk about restorative justice. Tell that to the shopkeeper robbed for the third time because of lax Liberal bail laws. Tell that to the seniors imprisoned in their homes in fear of the crime wave unleashed by the Liberal government. Tell that to the mother who buried her son after a Liberal-sponsored gang shooting. Is the Liberal government going to restore her son's life? There is nothing restorative about that, only Liberal failure and injustice. To bring justice to victims and Canadians across this country, we must scrap Liberal bail.

Premiers, provincial attorneys general and police chiefs across the country, including from the York Regional Police in Richmond Hill, have begged Parliament to fix the Liberals' soft-on-crime bail before more blood is spilled by the Liberal-sponsored crime wave, but the pro-crime Liberals refused. They ignored the warnings and calls to action from victims, police and communities alike. They left officers demoralized and communities exposed to the crime wave the Liberals unleashed. It went so far that the Liberal minister of injustice mocked victims by referring to this Liberal-sponsored crime wave as not being the Wild West. It is Canada, but it sure feels like it.

Conservatives will stand with the police, who risk their lives—

[Amarjeet Gill, Conservative, Brampton West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, today I rise in the chamber to support Conservative Bill C-242, the jail not bail act.

I will be sharing my time with my colleague, the member for Richmond Hill South.

Canadians are tired of waking up to headlines that read like crime thrillers except that they are real and are happening in our neighbourhoods. In Brampton, families do not feel safe anymore. Crime is no longer the exception but is becoming the norm. Residents and communities are being impacted every day, with violent home invasions, daylight shootings, carjackings, sexual assaults and repeat offenders walking free. This is the result of Liberal catch-and-release justice and a broken bail system that puts criminals ahead of victims and communities. It is why I rise today in support of Bill C-242, the jail not bail act, a Conservative solution to restore law and order and to protect innocent Canadians.

Let me share the statistics under the Liberal catch-and-release system. Homicides are up 29%, violent crime is up by 55%, sexual assaults have increased by 76%, extortion has surged by 330%, auto thefts are up by 25%, hate crimes are up by 258% and firearms crimes are up by 130%. These are not just numbers; these are real people, victims whose lives have been shattered by repeat violent offenders who should never have been released.

In Markham, a 54-year-old man was left seriously injured in a violent home invasion. One of the suspects was already out on bail despite facing charges for robbery with a firearm and attempted murder. In Toronto, a woman was stabbed in broad daylight by a man who had been released on bail just days earlier. In Vancouver, organized crime rings are recruiting youth to commit car thefts and armed robberies, knowing they will be released within hours. In my community of Brampton, a home invasion resulted in the death of a young Canadian. In one of the most heartbreaking cases, Bailey McCourt was murdered by her ex-husband just hours after he was released on bail following an assault conviction.

We are witnessing an exponential rise in crime across the country, but nowhere is it more evident than in my hometown of Brampton. In the Peel region, police recently made the largest drug bust in its history. Shockingly, six of the nine accused were already out on bail. In another major operation, targeting an extortion ring, half of the people arrested were also on judicial release. Just weeks ago in Brampton, a violent home invasion ended with a father's being shot for doing nothing more than defending his home and family. This is the result of the Liberals' Bill C-5 and Bill C-75, which introduced the so-called principle of restraint, a policy that prioritizes release even when the accused has a violent history or is likely to reoffend.

Police officers, victims and legal experts have all said the same thing: The bail system is broken, and now is the time to fix it. The solution is jail, not bail, restoring safety and trust back on our streets, in our homes and in our lives. Bill C-242, the jail not bail act, is a common-sense Conservative solution that would put public safety first and restore trust in our justice system. Judges and police would have to prioritize protecting the public, not just the rights of the accused, when deciding on bail.

The bill would take away automatic bail for violent offenders. If someone is charged with a major violent offence, like attempted murder, sexual assault, kidnapping or armed robbery, they would not be released automatically. If they have already been convicted of a major offence in the last 10 years and are charged again while out on bail, the bill proposes that they must be detained.

The bill would allow only judges to decide bail for repeat offenders. Police officers can now release someone charged with a major offence. Only a superior court judge would be able to make that decision. It would also remove criminals as sureties. People convicted of a serious crime in the last 10 years would not be able to act as a surety; there would be no more criminals vouching for criminals.

The bill proposes stronger rules for non-citizens. Non-citizens and non-permanent residents would hand over their passport before being released, reducing flight risk.

The bill would offer better risk assessment. The law would change the standard from “substantial likelihood” to “reasonably foreseeable”, making it easier to detain someone who poses a threat. Judges would also consider the accused's criminal history, including past failures to comply with bail. It would ask for an annual transparency report. The minister of justice would have to publish a yearly report on bail reforms, bail outcomes, repetition and disparities so Canadians would know what is working and what is not.

Conservatives are taking the lead. While the Liberals stall and spin, Conservatives are acting. We are calling on the House to immediately pass Bill C-242. We are ready to support extended sittings to get this done because Canadians deserve safe streets, a justice system they can depend on to protect them, and no more headlines about violent criminals walking free.

Before I end, I have a message for Brampton residents, which is that they should stay strong. We all know that injustice has risen in our community for far too long; that is why, as their member of Parliament, I, alongside the Conservative Party, will work tirelessly to make our streets safer. I will stop at nothing to ensure that the residents of Brampton will once again feel safe and protected in the community and in their own home.

The choice is clear. Canadians are tired of excuses. We can continue down the Liberal path of hug-a-thug justice, where innocent, law-abiding Canadians live in fear, or we can stand up for the victims, restore law and order and put violent criminals where they belong: behind bars. Let us pass the jail not bail act. Let us protect Canadians. Let us bring safety back to our streets.

[Tamara Jansen, Conservative, Cloverdale—Langley City, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the number one responsibility of government is to keep its citizens safe: safe in their homes, safe in their businesses and safe in their communities. It is not partisan and not optional; it is fundamental, but right now that promise has been broken.

Under the Liberals' Bill C-75, our bail system was rewritten. Judges were ordered to apply a so-called principle of restraint. That means repeat violent offenders, people who are known to police and who have a record of crime after crime, are put right back on our streets. It has left my community of Cloverdale—Langley City living in fear. Today, I want to share three stories, not from some faraway place and not from a textbook or report. These are stories from my own backyard of businesses, families and seniors who have paid the price for Ottawa's dangerous experiment with catch-and-release justice.

First, picture a wedding banquet. Families are gathered. Music is playing. Parents are dancing with their children. That is what a banquet hall is supposed to be: a place of joy and community. However, in Surrey, at the Reflections Banquet Hall, that joy was shattered. Instead of wedding bells, there were gunshots. Instead of safety, there was fear. The hall became a target of an extortion network that has been terrorizing South Asian businesses across the Fraser Valley.

In early June, the owner, Satish Kumar, received a voice mail demanding $2 million and threatening his family. Within days, shots were fired at three businesses connected to him. This is what organized extortion looks like: anonymous calls, threats against children or warning shots at the door if they do not pay. It is not just one victim. It chills a whole corridor of small businesses. Weddings get cancelled, bookings dry up and an entire community starts looking over its shoulder.

Here is the core failure: a legal environment that emboldens criminals. When the consequence for violent intimidation is a quick release, the message that sends is to keep going. Liberal Bill C-75's principle of restraint and Bill C-5's repeal of mandatory jail time for serious gun crimes, including extortion with a firearm, have combined to lower the cost of terror for gangs and raised the cost of living for everybody else. The banquet hall was not just a building; it was supposed to be a safe place for families while the law did not protect it.

Then there is the tragic story of Tori Dunn. Tori is not just a name in the newspaper. She is a daughter, a friend. She is one of us, and she was attacked brutally by a man who never should have been free, a man with a record, a man known to police, a man who, under any system that valued the safety of women and the safety of families, would have been behind bars, but because of Liberal Bill C-75, he was not. He was out on bail, and Tori paid the price.

When I talk to people in my riding about Tori's story, they do not just shake their heads; they clench their fists and ask how this could happen and how our justice system could look at his record and set him free. She was 30, an entrepreneur, a daughter and a friend, and she was brutally killed in her own home in Port Kells in 2024. Her murderer, Adam Mann, was already facing eight other charges, including aggravated assault, from just a week earlier.

We do not need a law degree to see the pattern. The Liberals told the courts to restrain themselves, the courts complied, a dangerous man was back in the community, a young woman is dead and her family is left asking how a system could see the risk and choose release.

This is not complicated. When Parliament says to err on the side of release, people like Tori carry the risk. This is not just about Tori, though. It is about every woman who wonders if she is safe walking home at night. It is about every parent who wonders if their daughter will make it home. It is about whether the justice system values the safety of our families or the comfort of repeat offenders.

Let me tell members about something else that happened just down the road from my place in the heart of Langley. It was early morning, June 1, on the Fraser Highway. The sun had barely risen. A woman was standing by the curb, when out of nowhere she was shoved into the street. She fell really hard, and before she could even get her bearings, she was kicked and punched again and again. All of it was captured on video. This was not a scuffle. This was not a misunderstanding. It was a brutal, unprovoked attack. The man responsible, Hugh Mason, is no stranger to police. He is already known for violence and already known for breaching the law, yet he was there on our streets free to lash out at an innocent woman.

Here is what makes this hit home even worse for me. This was not just any street corner. This was steps away from the seniors home built by my own church community, the home where my grandparents lived. It is filled with seniors who worked a lifetime, who built this country and who should be able to walk outside without fear.

Imagine the conversations after that crime, with seniors asking their grandchildren to walk them to the pharmacy because they do not feel safe alone. That is not the Canada they helped build. That is not the promise they earned, yet here we are because a bail system tilted in favour of the offender gave another chance to a man who had already burned through all his chances, and because Bill C-75, by the Liberals, told judges to restrain themselves, even when restraint meant danger for everybody else.

This is what catch-and-release looks like in real life. It is not just a line in a bill, but fear in the eyes of our grandmothers and grandfathers, our opas and omas. That fear, my friends, is something we have the power and the responsibility to end.

At the end of the day, this is not about politics. It is not about left and right. It is about whether a mom can walk her child to school without fear, whether a small business owner can open his doors without an extortionist calling at midnight and whether a senior, like our omas and opas, can sit on a porch without looking over their shoulder.

The Conservatives have put forward the jail not bail act, not because it sounds good on paper but because it puts people first. It says that public safety is the priority. It says that if a person commits a major crime, like pulling a gun, breaking into a home or assaulting their neighbour, they do not just stroll back onto the streets the next day. This bill would tip the scales back to where they belong. It restores balance. It protects victims. It puts common sense back at the heart of justice.

I say to the Prime Minister that if he is serious about restoring peace to our communities, he will back the bill. He will correct his justice minister, and he will reverse his party's failed bail laws, because Canadians deserve better than ideology. They deserve safety.

Let us do the right thing. Let us stand together. Let us pass the jail not bail act, and let us give our communities back their peace.