Strong Borders Act

An Act respecting certain measures relating to the security of the border between Canada and the United States and respecting other related security measures

Sponsor

Status

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.

Summary

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 .

Elsewhere

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:

C-2 (2021) Law An Act to provide further support in response to COVID-19
C-2 (2020) COVID-19 Economic Recovery Act
C-2 (2019) Law Appropriation Act No. 3, 2019-20
C-2 (2015) Law An Act to amend the Income Tax Act

Debate Summary

line drawing of robot

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

  • Enhance national security and community safety: The Liberal party supports Bill C-2 to provide law enforcement with updated tools to secure borders, combat transnational organized crime, stop illegal fentanyl flow, and crack down on money laundering, while protecting Charter rights.
  • Strengthen border and immigration systems: The bill equips law enforcement with tools for export container searches to stop auto theft, updates the Coast Guard's security mandate, and introduces measures to improve the asylum system and combat immigration fraud.
  • Disrupt organized crime and illicit financing: Bill C-2 allows rapid control of fentanyl precursor chemicals, enables warranted searches of mail for contraband, and imposes tougher penalties and restrictions on cash transactions to combat money laundering and illicit profits.

Conservative

  • Opposes civil liberties infringements: The party opposes provisions allowing warrantless access to personal information from online service providers, the opening of mail without a warrant, and blanket restrictions on cash transactions, viewing them as government overreach that compromises privacy.
  • Criticizes soft-on-crime policies: Conservatives condemn the bill for failing to address the root causes of rising crime, such as the lack of bail reform for repeat violent offenders and the absence of mandatory minimum sentences for fentanyl traffickers and gun criminals.
  • Bill is an inadequate response: The party views the bill as an omnibus approach that is a delayed and insufficient response to border security and crime crises, lacking concrete action and resources after a decade of Liberal inaction.

NDP

  • Opposes sweeping surveillance powers: The NDP opposes the bill's expansion of warrantless surveillance, allowing government agencies to demand personal information from various service providers without judicial oversight, threatening privacy and Charter rights.
  • Condemns criminalization of migrants: The party condemns the bill for criminalizing migration, denying hearings to refugees from the United States, blocking applications, and ignoring risks of persecution, echoing Trump's asylum policies.
  • Rejects omnibus power grab: The NDP rejects Bill C-2 as a 140-page omnibus power grab that makes sweeping changes across multiple acts, undermines due process, and bypasses parliamentary debate, comparing it to Bill C-51.

Bloc

  • Supports bill in principle for committee study: The Bloc Québécois supports sending Bill C-2 to committee for an in-depth, exhaustive study, but emphasizes this is not a blank cheque and demands sufficient time and expert testimony.
  • Prioritizes border security and crime: The party agrees with the bill's core objectives of securing the border, fighting transnational organized crime, and addressing issues like fentanyl, stolen vehicles, and illicit financing.
  • Concerns about resources and individual rights: The Bloc raises significant concerns about chronic understaffing at CBSA and RCMP, and potential infringements on privacy, rights, and freedoms, including intrusive powers and lower evidentiary thresholds.
  • Protects Quebec's jurisdiction and limits power: The party demands respect for Quebec's immigration jurisdiction, fair distribution of asylum seekers, compensation for Quebec's disproportionate burden, and limits on the Minister of Immigration's expanded discretionary powers.

Green

  • Opposes omnibus format: The Green Party opposes the bill as an illegitimate omnibus, encompassing multiple unrelated legislative purposes, and calls for its withdrawal to focus on its alleged purpose.
  • Harms refugee protection: The bill makes it harder for individuals to claim refugee status, potentially violating international obligations by expediting deportations without due process.
  • Undermines privacy rights: The legislation raises significant Charter concerns by allowing greater access to Canadians' private information for U.S. agencies and permitting government access to mail and internet data with a low threshold.
Was this summary helpful and accurate?

Strong Borders ActGovernment Orders

September 16th, 2025 / 11:55 a.m.

Conservative

Marc Dalton Conservative Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC

Madam Speaker, there might be a new Prime Minister and some new Liberal members, but it is the same old policy. As a matter of fact, we are seeing things getting worse. The deficit, when they eventually put the budget forward, looks like it is going to be double what was originally intended.

We are seeing a lot of talk, and I am hearing that on the doorsteps and as I am talking with businesses. They are saying it sounds really good, but they are not seeing the evidence. Bill C-2 seems to be more of that: a lot of talk and not much evidence.

Strong Borders ActGovernment Orders

September 16th, 2025 / 11:55 a.m.

Bloc

Andréanne Larouche Bloc Shefford, QC

Madam Speaker, in his speech, my colleague touched on border security. I live in an area not far from the border with the United States, and I have had the opportunity to look into the issue of border crossings.

The major issue is that there were job cuts at the border crossings under the Conservatives. The Liberal government boasts about being a new government and having a fresh vision. It is now proposing improvements to border crossings, but without hiring additional staff for the Canada Border Services Agency.

Quebec is calling for this, and so are we. Additional staff is essential to really address this security issue.

What does my colleague think about that?

Strong Borders ActGovernment Orders

September 16th, 2025 / 11:55 a.m.

Conservative

Marc Dalton Conservative Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC

Madam Speaker, the situation at the border is getting much worse. Roxham Road is not far from Montreal. We, the Conservatives, support the idea of hiring thousands more officers in order to end drug trafficking and human smuggling.

We would also like to see officers stationed not only at official border crossings, but also along the entire length of the border. People can cross illegally by other routes. Investments must also be made in acquiring scanners for ports and in many other areas.

We need to take our borders seriously.

Strong Borders ActGovernment Orders

September 16th, 2025 / 11:55 a.m.

Conservative

Brad Vis Conservative Mission—Matsqui—Abbotsford, BC

Madam Speaker, according to Statistics Canada, total sexual assaults have risen 74.83%, 90% of which are against women. Why has the Liberal Party enacted policies that have done so much to hurt and damage women? Do the Liberals not respect the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the right of women to live free of the fear of being hurt in our society?

Strong Borders ActGovernment Orders

September 16th, 2025 / 11:55 a.m.

Conservative

Marc Dalton Conservative Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC

Madam Speaker, it is stunning, because the Liberals have brought in laws that essentially force judges to release criminals on the least onerous terms and as quickly as possible. It is not just chaos; it is dangerous, and women are feeling it.

Strong Borders ActGovernment Orders

September 16th, 2025 / noon

Liberal

Julie Dzerowicz Liberal Davenport, ON

Madam Speaker, it is a real honour for me to rise in the House for the first time after the summer to speak to Bill C-2, the strong borders act. I am speaking on behalf of the residents of my constituency of Davenport, whom I am so honoured to represent for the fourth time.

The need for the legislation is as great today as it was when it was introduced in June, and I look forward to helping make the case for the bill. When we talk about strong borders, on this side of the House, we are not talking about building walls; we are talking about providing tools that would protect everyone in Canada from the kinds of threats we could not have imagined not that long ago.

Let us think of Bill C-2 as offering a tool kit. The tools in the bill are designed to protect us from organized crime, hostile state actors, human traffickers, money launderers and drug cartels. These are the people who are flooding our streets with fentanyl, sexually exploiting children online, smuggling people to our borders or trying to make dirty money clean. These are criminals, plain and simple, who are using every tool of modern technology to commit crimes.

Law enforcement is playing catch-up as criminals find new ways to exploit gaps in our system as quickly as we close the ones they were just using. Some call it playing whack-a-mole. We can argue over the finer points of what we should be doing, but there can be no argument at all over the need for immediate and urgent action. We on this side of the House believe that Bill C-2 is the action we must take to properly protect our borders and to move on multiple fronts. This explains why the bill touches on so many areas.

For example, we might not have the Oceans Act at the very top of our list for amending when thinking of the strong borders act, but by making adjustments and including it in the proposed legislation, if passed, the bill would allow the Coast Guard to conduct security patrols and collect, analyze and share information and intelligence for security purposes. This would help protect our maritime borders, especially in the Arctic.

Fentanyl traffickers both inside and outside Canada use Canada Post to move their lethal product. A tiny amount of fentanyl, mere milligrams, can kill someone. It also fits neatly into an envelope. Under the current Canada Post Corporation Act, it is illegal for that envelope to be opened. However, if Bill C-2 passes, it would change that. With the bill, law enforcement could go to a judge, obtain a warrant, and search and seize drugs such as fentanyl from Canada Post mail. With this change, Canada Post would be on exactly the same footing as the big courier companies, and criminals would lose an easy way to ship drugs.

This is a much-needed policy change. For criminals, borders are something to be ignored. Borders are an inconvenience. They add to the cost of doing business. Our job is to make borders real and to make sure criminals cannot hide behind our modern communication tools to conduct their business. For Canada, this means ensuring law enforcement can properly investigate those who would do us harm by creating a proper lawful access regime to allow law enforcement to respond to the challenges it faces from criminals.

The changes proposed in Bill C-2 would help bring our laws and policies in line with those of our allies, particularly in the Five Eyes alliance; they have had their own versions of some of the same tools for many years. It is important to remember that the Canadian version will be in keeping with Canadian values, consistent with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

There has been considerable public discussion about this issue since Bill C-2 was tabled, and I look forward to the debate in this venerable House over the coming hours and days.

There is one important element I want to highlight about our proposal. Some have argued that the lawful access regime being proposed is a major attack on privacy rights. I would argue that it is not. Rather, it is carefully structured to calibrate law enforcement's access to information with the nature of information being sought. For the vast majority of information requests, a judicial warrant is required. There are a couple of exceptions to that, but they are ones that I believe all sides of the House can support.

I will give a couple of examples. First, Bill C-2 clarifies the ability of law enforcement to use specific powers and seize specific information without a warrant in urgent, time-sensitive circumstances. One such circumstance would be the live and active abuse of a child. I am sure we can all agree that stopping the abuse of a child is an appropriate exercise of police authority.

The second and other instance is when police are trying to find basic information about someone as part of an investigation. This typically happens in the early stages of a police investigation. What we are talking about here is basic information, essentially something that responds to simple yes-or-no kinds of questions. What police would glean from the answer would allow them to go to a judge, seek a warrant and obtain more information. Again, the object of the exercise is to allow law enforcement to move at the same speed as the criminals they are pursuing. Due process is maintained, but speed is also critical for police when pursuing those who use digital tools to communicate.

The bill has many more elements, and we will be discussing them over the course of the debate today. Amendments to the proceeds of crime, the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act, the Sex Offender Information Registration Act, the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, the Criminal Code and the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, among others, all add up to a complete and compelling package of reforms that modernize our laws and protect us from those who would do us harm.

Bill C-2 builds on the work we began last December when we announced a $1.3-billion investment in border security. These additional investments are helping our law enforcement and intelligence agencies keep pace with transnational organized crime groups, which have become more sophisticated in their use of new technologies, such as drones, 3-D printers and encrypted communications, to carry out cross-border crimes.

Under our border plan, we are hiring more personnel and delivering more tools and resources, such as advanced technology, drones, surveillance equipment, canine teams, helicopters and more. We have also listed seven transnational organized crime groups as terrorist entities under the Criminal Code and are constantly monitoring to determine if more should be added. These listings allow us to take direct action against organized crime groups, such as by freezing their assets in Canada.

Canadians expect us to do everything we can to combat crime and keep people safe. It is our essential duty as a government. The bill is necessary, but we make no claims of perfection. The Minister of Public Safety has made it clear that the government is open to constructive amendments. I look forward to an equally constructive debate today.

Strong Borders ActGovernment Orders

September 16th, 2025 / 12:05 p.m.

Conservative

Rhonda Kirkland Conservative Oshawa, ON

Mr. Speaker, there are so many elements of this speech by the member opposite that I could address, including why Canadians should trust the same old Liberal government to fix the crisis when it created the crisis. The member even referenced that it was the same government in part of her speech.

However, the part that I am most interested in is what she said about Canada Post opening mail. She said that law enforcement can go to a judge and get a warrant. I wonder if the member opposite could read the portion of the bill that describes clearly that the judge and the warrant would be required.

Strong Borders ActGovernment Orders

September 16th, 2025 / 12:10 p.m.

Liberal

Julie Dzerowicz Liberal Davenport, ON

Mr. Speaker, the strong borders act would make critical amendments to legislation that would advance our government's priorities to keep Canadians safe and secure through strengthening our border and making some additional changes, including the changes that she has referenced to the Canada Post Corporation Act. The way crime is conducted these days has absolutely changed, so the government has to modernize its legislation to be able to go after the perpetrators.

Strong Borders ActGovernment Orders

September 16th, 2025 / 12:10 p.m.

Bloc

Andréanne Larouche Bloc Shefford, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her speech addressing the issue of criminal gangs and border security.

I would like to point out that the Bloc Québécois has already raised this issue, particularly through the bill introduced by my colleague from Rivière-du-Nord, which sought to cut off funding to criminal organizations. I should point out that one of the purposes of the bill was to make it easier to seize property belonging to anyone convicted of an offence involving criminal gangs. To help fight organized crime, the bill also provided for the creation of a list of criminal organizations. As a matter of principle, we would be happy to go back to committee to study Bill C‑2, in particular by taking a constructive approach to improving it.

Has my colleague had a chance to look at the bill my colleague introduced last fall? Does she think that might be an avenue to explore going forward?

Strong Borders ActGovernment Orders

September 16th, 2025 / 12:10 p.m.

Liberal

Julie Dzerowicz Liberal Davenport, ON

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member and the other members of the Bloc Québécois for being very passionate about this issue. There should be no doubt about it: Bill C-2 is about taking more decisive action to crack down on crime. That absolutely means that we will be cracking down on money laundering and terrorist financing. I want to assure the member that any ideas they have should be brought to committee, which is where the bill would go. We will take all the best ideas to make sure that this is the strongest bill possible moving forward.

Strong Borders ActGovernment Orders

September 16th, 2025 / 12:10 p.m.

Liberal

Arielle Kayabaga Liberal London West, ON

Mr. Speaker, I would first like to welcome my colleague back to the House of Commons and thank her for the very reflective thoughts that she shared. We have listened, in the House of Commons today, to many comments that our colleagues have made about the bill. We know that Canadians sent us here with a mandate to collaborate. Canadian voters, including Conservative voters, want us to take action on the borders.

Can the member talk about ways that we can co-operate, collaborate and even take the bill to committee, make sure that many amendments are considered and bring the bill to pass?

Strong Borders ActGovernment Orders

September 16th, 2025 / 12:10 p.m.

Liberal

Julie Dzerowicz Liberal Davenport, ON

Mr. Speaker, indeed, I think it is non-partisan. It is absolutely important for us to ensure that we continue to have updated legislation that allows our government to take strong action to prevent crime, to ensure that our law enforcement officers at all levels have the tools they need to disrupt any type of crime and to hold people to account for criminal activity. I will tell everyone that we will take the best suggestions. We will work with all members of every party in the House to ensure that we have the strongest law both now and moving forward.

Strong Borders ActGovernment Orders

September 16th, 2025 / 12:10 p.m.

Conservative

Ted Falk Conservative Provencher, MB

Mr. Speaker, I think the member misrepresented what the bill really does. What the bill really does is expand surveillance and data collection from individuals without requiring a judicial warrant. She said it would require one.

That is not what the bill says. Could she clarify her comments?

Strong Borders ActGovernment Orders

September 16th, 2025 / 12:10 p.m.

Liberal

Julie Dzerowicz Liberal Davenport, ON

Mr. Speaker, first I will say to the member that I think we have spent quite a bit of time addressing issues of privacy here in the House. If there are any concerns around privacy on his part and, for some reason, we need to make adjustments around the privacy concerns he might have, I would ask him to bring them to committee.

Strong Borders ActGovernment Orders

September 16th, 2025 / 12:15 p.m.

Conservative

Rhonda Kirkland Conservative Oshawa, ON

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise today on behalf of the hard-working residents of Oshawa. When I return from my city to the chamber, I always carry the voices of our workers in Oshawa who build our economy, of families who keep our neighbourhood strong and of young people who deserve the chance to build a future in the city they call home. They are the strength of Oshawa, and they deserve a government as strong as they are and as hard-working as they are.

Every family in Oshawa deserves and wants the same thing: safe streets where children can walk without fear, secure borders that stop drugs and guns from entering our neighbourhoods, and a government that protects their rights while holding criminals accountable. Bill C-2 claims to deliver these things, but a closer look shows it offers more rhetoric than results. It mixes a few measures worth supporting with many that leave Canadians feeling less free, less safe and less confident in their government.

The fentanyl crisis has devastated many Canadian communities, including my own in Oshawa and our downtown core. Too many lives have been cut short. Too many parents have stood in sorrow at vigils for their sons and their daughters. First responders race from call to call, fighting to save lives from overdose after overdose, reflecting the depth of a crisis, including the human cost, that continues to grip our city.

Liberals create a crisis and somehow expect Canadians to trust that they are the ones to fix it. It is not enough to ban chemicals; traffickers must face justice, yet the bill would allow many dealers to serve sentences from home. Families in Oshawa do not believe that a fentanyl dealer should be sitting on the couch; they believe the dealer should be behind bars. These dealers are not small-time offenders; they are people whose actions have ended lives, destroyed families and terrorized our communities.

For 10 years, the Liberal government has failed to secure Canada's borders. Our officers do their best with the tools they have, but the tools are not enough. Illegal drugs, stolen vehicles and firearms flow in while Canadians pay the price. Throughout that time, Conservatives have consistently called for stronger border security, more CBSA agents, high-powered scanners at land crossings and ports, and systems to track departures of deportees. These are practical steps that would stop threats before they hit our streets.

Cracking down on money laundering is essential of course. Oshawa families work hard, pay their taxes and play by the rules. Criminal gangs should not be able to wash their profits through loopholes, yet part 11 of Bill C-2 takes a wrong turn. It would impose a blanket ban on cash transactions over $10,000. While gangsters have used cash to launder money, this sweeping ban would punish law-abiding citizens, such as seniors who rely on cash, tradespeople and small businesses, without evidence that it would stop organized crime at all.

What I find even more troubling is that access to cash can be crucial for women and individuals trying to escape abusive relationships, because financial independence can be a lifeline. I cannot tell members how many times I have encountered victims of intimate partner violence who feel stuck and trapped. Without control over their money, it becomes much easier for an abuser to maintain power and control, trapping the person in a cycle of dependence and making it harder to safely escape. Taking away cash as a safe option leaves some of the most vulnerable Canadians with fewer tools to protect themselves.

Perhaps the most concerning factors of Bill C-2 are the sections that would undermine civil liberties. The Supreme Court has affirmed that Canadians have a right to privacy in their Internet records. Bill C-2 seeks to undo that, allowing officials to obtain subscriber information without a warrant in so-called urgent circumstances.

Shockingly, the bill would even give Canada Post new powers to open and inspect personal mail. Canadians should be confident that what they send through the mail will remain private and confidential. Allowing the government to rifle through letters and packages is a dangerous intrusion into everyday life. It is exactly the kind of invasion of privacy I came to expect as normal when I lived in Communist China as a young teacher.

Part 15 goes further; it would compel companies to build back doors into their systems. Once built, those back doors could be accessed without judicial oversight. In a bid to win trade concessions from the U.S., the Prime Minister has put our rights and values on the bargaining table. Bill C-2's lawful access provisions would erode a last line of defence to ensure that people can have safe experiences online and off-line.

International human rights bodies have recognized the importance of encryption to protecting the safety and privacy of people. Encryption ensures that people have safe lines of communication online when they need them most. For survivors of intimate partner violence, encryption is a lifeline that secures confidential communication about escape plans and protects victims, including children, from abusers.

Many families in Oshawa include newcomers who fled regimes that spied on their citizens, and they came to Canada for freedom. They should not see those same shadows falling over their lives here.

Canadians remember 2022, when the government froze bank accounts of individuals it disagreed with politically. Under Bill C-2, banks could collect and use personal information without consent, and accounts could be frozen on suspicion alone. Ordinary Canadians should never face this risk. We learn from experience. When Liberals are given too much power, we can be certain they will abuse it.

Bill C-2 is over 100 pages long and would amend 14 acts, yet it omits reforms Canadians have been crying out for. Bail reform is absent. Catch and release would remain in place. There would be no mandatory prison terms for fentanyl traffickers or violent gangsters.

Families in Oshawa are now afraid to let their kids walk downtown. Shopkeepers are exhausted from repeat thefts. Police officers see the same criminals return to the streets. Canadians do not want gestures; it is time for action. Canadians wonder how our streets reached this point. Some claim we need bail reform, but in fact we already have it, and it is making things worse.

The Liberals' Bill C-75 rewrote the rule so that judges are instructed to let offenders out at the first chance and under the weakest conditions possible. That was not an accident; it was a deliberate policy. The results are plain to see in Vancouver. We know, and it has been said today, the same 40 habitual offenders have been cycled through our system over 6,000 times. That is about 150 arrests each in a single year, which is a shocking figure that tells the story of a system that has collapsed. Arrest, release and repeat is the reality across Canada.

Conservatives have been warning for years that this is a revolving door that endangers our neighbourhoods. What has the Prime Minister done? Instead of fixing the law, he closed Parliament, spent his summer globe-trotting and left Canadians to deal with the consequences. Imagine if instead of chasing headlines abroad he had repealed Bill C-75 months ago. How many break-ins, assaults or violent crimes could have been avoided?

Conservatives have offered practical solutions for many years. The Minister of Public Safety has already admitted the true purpose of the bill: removing irritants for the United States. Canadian security, for the minister, has become secondary. With Bill C-2, the government risks surrendering Canadians' privacy, financial freedoms and safety, all for political convenience. This is not leadership; this is appeasement.

Conservatives do not oppose all of Bill C-2. Some measures deserve to be studied and improved. However, we will not give the government a blank cheque to erode the freedoms of Canadians. Individuals should never be asked to choose between safety and liberty. They deserve both.