You were a roadie.
Gary Anandasangaree Liberal
Second reading (House), as of Sept. 17, 2025
Subscribe to a feed (what's a feed?) of speeches and votes in the House related to Bill C-2.
This is from the published bill. The Library of Parliament has also written a full legislative summary of the bill.
Part 1 amends the Customs Act to provide the Canada Border Services Agency with facilities free of charge for carrying out any purpose related to the administration or enforcement of that Act and other Acts of Parliament and to provide officers of that Agency with access at certain locations to goods destined for export. It also includes transitional provisions.
Part 2 amends the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act to create a new temporary accelerated scheduling pathway that allows the Minister of Health to add precursor chemicals to Schedule V to that Act. It also makes related amendments to the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (Police Enforcement) Regulations and the Precursor Control Regulations .
Part 3 amends the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act and the Cannabis Act to confirm that the Governor in Council may, on the recommendation of the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, make regulations exempting members of law enforcement from the application of any provision of the Criminal Code that creates drug-related inchoate offences when they are undertaking lawful investigations.
Part 4 amends the Canada Post Corporation Act to permit the demand, seizure, detention or retention of anything in the course of post only in accordance with an Act of Parliament. It also amends that Act to expand the Canada Post Corporation’s authority to open mail in certain circumstances to include the authority to open letters.
Part 5 amends the Oceans Act to provide that coast guard services include activities related to security and to authorize the responsible minister to collect, analyze and disclose information and intelligence.
Part 6 amends the Department of Citizenship and Immigration Act to authorize the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration to disclose, for certain purposes and subject to any regulations, personal information under the control of the Department within the Department and to certain other federal and provincial government entities.
It also amends the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act to authorize the making of regulations relating to the disclosure of information collected for the purposes of that Act to federal departments and agencies.
Part 7 amends the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act to, among other things,
(a) eliminate the designated countries of origin regime;
(b) authorize the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration to specify the information and documents that are required in support of a claim for refugee protection;
(c) authorize the Refugee Protection Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board to determine that claims for refugee protection that have not yet been referred to the Refugee Protection Division have been abandoned in certain circumstances;
(d) provide the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration with the power to determine that claims for refugee protection that have not yet been referred to the Refugee Protection Division have been withdrawn in certain circumstances;
(e) require the Refugee Protection Division and the Refugee Appeal Division to suspend certain proceedings respecting a claim for refugee protection if the claimant is not present in Canada;
(f) clarify that decisions of the Immigration and Refugee Board must be rendered, and reasons for those decisions must be given, in the manner specified by its Chairperson; and
(g) authorize regulations to be made setting out the circumstances in which the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration or the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness must designate, in relation to certain proceedings or applications, a representative for persons who are under 18 years of age or who are unable to appreciate the nature of the proceeding or application.
It also includes transitional provisions.
Part 8 amends the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act to, among other things,
(a) authorize the Governor in Council to make an order specifying that certain applications made under that Act are not to be accepted for processing, or that the processing of those applications is to be suspended or terminated, when the Governor in Council is of the opinion that it is in the public interest to do so;
(b) authorize the Governor in Council to make an order to cancel, suspend or vary certain documents issued under that Act, or to impose or vary conditions, when the Governor in Council is of the opinion that it is in the public interest to do so;
(c) for the application of an order referred to in paragraph (b), require a person to appear for an examination, answer questions truthfully and produce all relevant documents or evidence that an officer requires; and
(d) authorize the Governor in Council to make regulations prescribing circumstances in which a document issued under that Act can be cancelled, suspended or varied, and in which officers may terminate the processing of certain applications made under that Act.
Part 9 amends the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act to add two new grounds of ineligibility for claims for refugee protection as well as powers to make regulations respecting exceptions to those new grounds. It also includes a transitional provision respecting the retroactive application of those new grounds.
Part 10 amends the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act to, among other things,
(a) increase the maximum administrative monetary penalties that may be imposed for certain violations and the maximum punishments that may be imposed for certain criminal offences under that Act;
(b) replace the existing optional compliance agreement regime with a new mandatory compliance agreement regime that, among other things,
(i) requires every person or entity that receives an administrative monetary penalty for a prescribed violation to enter into a compliance agreement with the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada (the Centre),
(ii) requires the Director of the Centre to make a compliance order if the person or entity refuses to enter into a compliance agreement or fails to comply with such an agreement, and
(iii) designates the contravention of a compliance order as a new violation under that Act;
(c) require persons or entities referred to in section 5 of that Act, other than those already required to register, to enroll with the Centre; and
(d) authorize the Centre to disclose certain information to the Commissioner of Canada Elections, subject to certain conditions.
It also makes consequential and related amendments to other Acts and the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Administrative Monetary Penalties Regulations and includes transitional provisions.
Part 11 amends the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act to prohibit certain entities from accepting cash deposits from third parties and certain persons or entities from accepting cash payments, donations or deposits of $10,000 or more. It also makes a related amendment to the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Administrative Monetary Penalties Regulations .
Part 12 amends the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions Act to make the Director of the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada a member of the committee established under subsection 18(1) of that Act. It also amends the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act to enable the Director to exchange information with the other members of that committee.
Part 13 amends the Sex Offender Information Registration Act to, among other things,
(a) make certain changes to a sex offender’s reporting obligations, including the circumstances in which they are required to report, the information that must be provided and the time within which it is to be provided;
(b) provide that any of a sex offender’s physical characteristics that may assist in their identification may be recorded when they report to a registration centre;
(c) clarify what may constitute a reasonable excuse for a sex offender’s non-compliance with the requirement to give at least 14 days’ notice prior to a departure from their residence for seven or more consecutive days;
(d) authorize the Canada Border Services Agency to disclose certain information relating to a sex offender’s arrival in and departure from Canada to law enforcement agencies for the purposes of the administration and enforcement of that Act;
(e) authorize, in certain circumstances, the disclosure of information collected under that Act if there are reasonable grounds to believe that it will assist in the prevention or investigation of a crime of a sexual nature; and
(f) clarify that a person who discloses information under section 16 of that Act with the belief that they are acting in accordance with that section is not guilty of an offence under section 17 of that Act.
It also makes a related amendment to the Customs Act .
Part 14 amends various Acts to modernize certain provisions respecting the timely gathering and production of data and information during an investigation. It, among other things,
(a) amends the Criminal Code to, among other things,
(i) facilitate access to basic information that will assist in the investigation of federal offences through an information demand or a judicial production order to persons who provide services to the public,
(ii) clarify the response time for production orders and the ability of peace officers and public officers to receive and act on certain information that is voluntarily provided to them and on certain information that is publicly available,
(iii) specify certain circumstances in which peace officers and public officers may obtain evidence, including subscriber information, in exigent circumstances,
(iv) allow a justice or judge to authorize, in a warrant, a peace officer or public officer to obtain tracking data or transmission data that relates to any thing that is similar to a thing in relation to which data is authorized to be obtained under the warrant and that is unknown at the time the warrant is issued,
(v) provide and clarify authorities by which computer data may be examined, and
(vi) allow a justice or judge to authorize a peace officer or public officer to make a request to a foreign entity that provides telecommunications services to the public to produce transmission data or subscriber information that is in its possession or control;
(b) makes a consequential amendment to the Foreign Publishers Advertising Services Act ;
(c) amends the Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Act to allow the Minister of Justice to authorize a competent authority to make arrangements for the enforcement of a decision made by an authority of a state or entity that is empowered to compel the production of transmission data or subscriber information that is in the possession or control of a person in Canada;
(d) amends the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act to, among other things,
(i) facilitate access to basic information that will assist the Canadian Security Intelligence Service in the performance of its duties and functions under section 12 or 16 of that Act through information demands given to persons or entities that provide services to the public and judicial information orders against such persons and entities, and
(ii) clarify the response time for production orders; and
(e) amends the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act and the Cannabis Act to provide and clarify authorities by which computer data may be examined.
Part 15 enacts the Supporting Authorized Access to Information Act . That Act establishes a framework for ensuring that electronic service providers can facilitate the exercise, by authorized persons, of authorities to access information conferred under the Criminal Code or the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act .
Part 16 amends the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act to permit a person or entity referred to in section 5 of that Act to collect and use an individual’s personal information without that individual’s knowledge or consent if
(a) the information is disclosed to the person or entity by a government department, institution or agency or law enforcement agency; and
(b) the collection and use are for the purposes of detecting or deterring money laundering, terrorist activity financing or sanctions evasion or for a consistent purpose.
It also makes related amendments to the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act .
All sorts of information on this bill is available at LEGISinfo, an excellent resource from Parliament. You can also read the full text of the bill.
Bill numbers are reused for different bills each new session. Perhaps you were looking for one of these other C-2s:
This is a computer-generated summary of the speeches below. Usually it’s accurate, but every now and then it’ll contain inaccuracies or total fabrications.
Bill C-2, the Strong Borders Act, aims to enhance border security, combat transnational crime and fentanyl, and disrupt illicit financing through amendments to various acts. It proposes measures related to export inspections, information sharing, and asylum claims.
Liberal
Conservative
NDP
Bloc
Green
Strong Borders ActGovernment Orders
Sukhman Gill
You were a roadie.
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
I was not a roadie; I was a carny. I think that is the technical term, to correct the member for Abbotsford—South Langley.
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
Madam Speaker, I even went to the Red River Ex a few times and had a lot of fun there. The point is, if someone is running a small business, say a carnival game, they are going to have a lot of people paying individually in cash, and that is going to add up to a lot of cash by the end of the day. With the government putting constraints around the use of cash, we can note the impact it may have on small businesses, on different kinds of retail businesses, the challenges it may create and its impact on seniors, on rural communities and these sorts of things. Therefore we have concerns about the changes the government would be making with regard to the use of cash.
More fundamentally, the Liberals are obstructing and stepping on their own agenda by weaving into the bill provisions that make a lot of Canadians wonder why they are there. There are some additional concerns the bill raises around civil liberties. The Liberals have woven in provisions that involve, for instance, the abilities to open mail without oversight and to compel Internet companies to hand over private information. There are additional provisions around warrantless searches.
The Liberal government does not have a great track record when it comes to protecting Canadians' data. It does not have a great track record when it comes to understanding and respecting the privacy, the rights or the civil liberties of Canadians. However, a government that has done so badly in these areas is asking for more powers in the area of opening mail without oversight and compelling the transfer of private information, and also in the area of warrantless searches. These and the issues around cash that I raised address other concerns about what the government is really driving at with the bill.
What we really need to see is fundamental reforms to our criminal justice system that get us back to a time when crime was going down. Crime was going down before the Liberals took office; it has gone up since they took office. We need to ask why that has happened, and we need a reversal of approach.
Arielle Kayabaga Liberal London West, ON
Madam Speaker, I am very confused as to what the member opposite was trying to convey, because it sounds like, in theory, for the last four years I have been here, he has been talking about having a bill like the one that is before us. What exactly is he suggesting we can work on in committee to move it forward collaboratively? Canadian voters want us to have a bill for borders, as well as to work in co-operation with the whole House to make sure we can pass good and sensible bills.
What exactly is the member trying to shift and change in the bill? He spent four years talking about it. Now we have a bill, and he is complaining. What is he complaining about?
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
Madam Speaker, I am happy to repeat what I just said. We have concerns about the provisions in the bill around use of cash and the limiting of that. We have concerns about the restrictions on civil liberties. We have actually been asking for changes to sentencing, to parole and to bail. Those changes are not in the bill. The changes we have said are critically needed when it comes to criminal justice are not in the bill.
The Liberals have instead put forward a bill that has some supportable provisions but that weaves in some areas, some concepts, that are clearly of concern. I am sorry if it was necessary to repeat that, but hopefully it is clear to the member now the provisions we are talking about that are issues, like use of cash, as well as restrictions on civil liberties.
Xavier Barsalou-Duval Bloc Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC
Madam Speaker, welcome back to the House.
I listened to my colleague talk about Bill C‑2, but there is an elephant in the room when it comes to this bill. People are reluctant to talk about it, but it is one of the reasons why we in the Bloc Québécois are inclined to be in favour of this bill.
The number of asylum seekers at the border is skyrocketing. While much of this explosion in asylum claims is attributable to international events, some of it is due to irregular crossings. We believe that treating these people properly is important, but so is ensuring a fair distribution of asylum seekers across the country.
We know that, unfortunately, Quebec is still receiving the greatest share. In fact, Quebec takes in nearly 50% of the asylum seekers who come to Canada. Figures for the other provinces indicate that they are not doing their part. Not long ago, an ad in Le Journal de Montréal condemned this situation, and I was surprised to see that it caused something of a scandal. After all, the real scandal is that the other provinces are not pulling their weight.
Why must Quebec bear such a heavy burden? What are my colleague's thoughts on the unequal distribution of asylum seekers? Why are the other provinces not taking in more of them?
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
Madam Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for his question. I think it is important to discuss the issues plaguing the asylum seeker system.
We need to recognize that the overall immigration system been broken by the Liberals. Asylum seekers now have to wait a long time for their applications to be assessed. The solution is to implement an efficient system where asylum claims are assessed very quickly and fairly. It would be good for both Canada and asylum seekers to have clarity on each case and to put an end to the wait for a decision.
Frank Caputo Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Nicola, BC
Madam Speaker, it is always a pleasure to rise on behalf of the people of Kamloops—Thompson—Nicola.
I just want to reflect on a question my colleague from the Liberals just asked about the fact that Conservatives have been asking for this type of thing for four years. The reality is, in my view, that Conservatives have been asking for changes to bail, changes to sentencing, changes to how we deal with fentanyl and changes to how we deal with firearms.
Is there anything here the member can point to as to why it took so long and what is really missing here?
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
Madam Speaker, my colleague is the shadow minister for our party on this issue and is doing excellent work advocating for public safety.
There are some weird things, unrelated to the objective, woven into the bill, but also many of the things we have been asking for that are needed are missing. The government should take its cue from what we have put forward, like bail reform legislation and other proposals that would actually confront the problems in an effective way.
Costas Menegakis Conservative Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON
Madam Speaker, it is a great pleasure to be back in the House representing the good people of Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill. After a long summer away, I confess that I have mixed feelings about that. I am happy to be back, but at the same time, this is the 22nd day this year that we are sitting in the House. I think that Canadians would have expected us to work through the summer rather than be home. Even though it is always a pleasure to engage with our constituents, we are elected to do a job for Canadians. It would have been so much better had we been here in the House, or at least in committees, working through the summer. The Liberals, of course, felt otherwise.
While I enjoyed my time in my riding this summer, I was disheartened to constantly hear from so many people in our community that they feel unsafe. After 10 years of the very tired Liberal government, people do not feel comfortable walking to school. They are unsafe taking public transit. They do not feel safe in their own homes. This is due to a wave of violent crime that has swept through communities throughout our country, particularly in urban areas, such as the one I represent in Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill.
Due to the Liberal government's catch-and-release policies, repeat offenders continue to be released back into communities, where they can terrorize the communities again and perpetrate even more crimes, which are in many cases crimes similar to, or the same as, the ones they had been arrested for. Since the Liberals took office, soft-on-crime policies have caused crime rates to skyrocket. Violent crime is up 50%. Homicides are up 28%. Extortion is up a staggering 350%. Auto thefts are up 46%. Human trafficking is up 84%. Worst of all, total sexual violations against children are up 119%.
We cannot forget that behind each of these statistics are real people who have suffered and who are continuing to suffer, who are frightened and who continue to be frightened. Two people, including an 11-year-old girl, lost their lives, killed, as a result of an arson, a deliberate arson, in the place they should have felt safest, their own home. This was in my community, where I live, in Richmond Hill.
A man in Vaughan, as we heard yesterday in the House, from my very learned and exceptional colleague from King—Vaughan, was killed during a home invasion. A criminal walked in. This thug put a gun to his daughter's head. Naturally, a father would react. Upon his reaction to protect his little girl, he was shot dead in front of his family, leaving the children to grow up without their father.
In Niagara, and this is very sickening, Daniel Senecal was charged with breaking and entering, aggravated assault and sexual interference of a three-year-old girl. The child suffered serious injuries and had to be rushed to an out-of-region hospital for advanced care. Senecal also requested to be transferred to a women's prison.
The justice minister tweeted, just a few weeks ago, “This isn’t the Wild West.” My constituents have told me that they feel it is far worse than the Wild West. It certainly feels like it is because these criminals are free to reoffend at will. They get caught one day, and police services across the country are telling us that they are frustrated because they are then released the next day. The minister, like the Liberal government, is once again out of touch with the everyday struggles facing my constituents and, indeed, all Canadians from coast to coast to coast.
Bill C-2 fails to bring bail reform that would end catch-and-release policies. It fails to implement mandatory prison sentences for fentanyl traffickers, who kill thousands. In fact, more people have died from opioid and fentanyl overdoses in this country than were killed in the Second World War, which is a staggering statistic. The bill fails to bring in new mandatory prison time for gangsters who commit crimes with guns and wreak havoc on our streets, which are rampant and everywhere. It would fail to eliminate house arrest for some of the most serious offences, allowing those who brutalize our communities to serve their sentences from the comfort of their own homes. I am deeply concerned that this bill does not go far enough to fight crime and bring safety back to our communities.
The bill would allow for new powers, such as opening mail, without oversight, based just on suspicion. It would compel Internet companies to hand over private information, allow for warrantless searches and eliminate the use of cash. That does not make sense. Cash has been legal tender in Canada since the inception of cash in this country. As we heard from the previous speaker, many communities, such as people in the north, seniors and so forth, do not have a credit card system. Some of them do not have Internet to transact their business online. Cash is very important. This bill would limit the use of cash.
The bill raises serious concerns about privacy, surveillance and civil liberties. I would argue, as would many Canadians, that judicial and parliamentary oversight are fundamental principles of our democracy. They need to be there. We cannot give arbitrary powers without having the proper oversight to ensure that there is fairness in the system. The bill would expand lawful access powers, allowing police, security agencies and others to demand information from various service providers, including hotels, banks, doctors and more, to release private information without judicial authorization. That is a direct infringement on the privacy of Canadians.
The bill has a low threshold to compel providers to provide subscriber information, account details and, in many instances, the time-stamp, location of service and other information that is normally considered private. Bill C-2 would give the minister and/or cabinet new powers to act unilaterally, without parliamentary or judicial oversight, based just on suspicion. Nebulous criteria and vagueness leave room for interpretation. They leave room for arbitrary decisions and possible discriminatory decision-making.
We have checks and balances in our democracy. This bill would take away a lot of those checks and balances. Conservatives have always fought for practical policies that would secure our borders and bring back safety to our communities while upholding Canadian rights.
It is not surprising that this tired Liberal government is bringing in a bill called the strong borders act. What is surprising is that the Liberals have been in power for 10 years and they have now decided, 10 years later, that we should have stronger borders and to put it in a bill. We would think that this would have been a priority from day one, but now, somehow, they want us to believe that the sweeping powers in this new bill are going to fix the problem and that we should listen to them because they know what needs to be done. In fact, a lot of the things in the bill that are supportable are things that we, as Conservatives, have been talking about in the House every day over the past 10 years, to ears on the other side of the House that have not been listening, in the tired Liberal government.
Conservatives support adding thousands of border agents, extending CBSA powers along the entire border, and installing border surveillance towers. We also support installing high-powered scanners at land crossings and shipping ports to spot drugs, guns and stolen cars. Most importantly, we will always support the hard-working men and women on the front lines. They are doing their very best with the limited resources they are given. They play a critical role in keeping Canadians safe by working to stop the flow of drugs and guns into our country, and for that, we should sincerely be very gracious and thankful.
Conservatives also support the government tracking departures, so government officials would know which deportees are in Canada illegally. Over the last 10 years, the Liberal government has broken our once proud immigration system and turned it into something very hollow. Thousands of immigrants entering into an already overburdened system has resulted in the worsening of housing, jobs and so forth.
As I wind down, though I have lots more I could say, I will say this: Only Conservatives will protect Canadians' freedoms and fight for a tough-on-crime approach, so they can live in their homes, feel safe, walk in their communities, take their children to school, go to a theatre and enjoy a peaceful, safe life.
Strong Borders ActGovernment Orders
September 16th, 2025 / 10:50 a.m.
Winnipeg North Manitoba
Liberal
Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Madam Speaker, there are some contradictions within the member's statements. On the one hand, he wants the government to take action on fentanyl, yet a drug dealer can put fentanyl into a normal envelope and bring it to Canada Post. This legislation would then allow, through a warrant, for that envelope to be opened. I would think that is a positive thing and that the member would support something of that nature, given that he wants more action done on the issue of fentanyl.
The good news is that the member spent the first part of his speech talking about the issue of bail. The Prime Minister has made a commitment, a platform commitment during the election, which is the most democratic aspect that takes place between our sittings. We made a commitment to bring in bail reform. The good news is that we are going to see that bail reform this fall. I wonder if he would be inclined to support that in a co-operative way, as the Conservative voters want more co-operation on the floor of the House of Commons.
Costas Menegakis Conservative Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON
Madam Speaker, I am inclined to believe the Liberals are not going to do anything they said they would do because the Prime Minister has been there for the last six months. In that six months, he has made a bunch of promises, none of which have been fulfilled. It was the Prime Minister and the Liberals who decided to prorogue Parliament, to not come back for the summer and to not allow committees to work. In many cases, the committees are not even working this week, the first week back. I do not trust what they say.
Andréanne Larouche Bloc Shefford, QC
Mr. Speaker, I will make a brief comment and then ask a question.
My colleague spoke about border security. I would like to remind everyone that a little over 10 years ago, when I was an assistant, the Conservatives made cuts to border posts. That had an impact on border security.
I, too, did a lot of work on the ground this summer. While people are indeed concerned about security, they are also worried about the cost of living. The vision at the federal level, from both the Liberals and the Conservatives, is focused on centralization. There is a tendency to implement programs, particularly in the areas of homelessness and housing, that are unsuitable for rural communities like the ones in my riding of Shefford, though it does include one major city, Granby. The money is not reaching our communities.
Costas Menegakis Conservative Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON
Madam Speaker, I was here 10 years ago. I was part of the Conservative government. We had an immigration system that was the envy of the world. We had an immigration system that worked. It responded to newcomers coming to the country. It provided the best possibility for positive outcomes for them and their families, while at the same time contributing to the Canadian economy.
Unfortunately, the Liberal government decided to forego a lot of the strategies, policies and controls we had in place, such as the vetting of new people coming to the country. It relaxed them. That has created the tremendous amount of problems we are seeing with crime in our communities, including the crime in the community the hon. member who asked the question is from.