Bill C-2

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

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 .

Strong Borders Act

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Madam Speaker, I would like to pass on my compliments for your appointment as Assistant Deputy Speaker. It is wonderful to see you in the chair.

I cannot speak without referencing the departmental plans. If I look back as far as 2019, when Ralph Goodale was in this place, and the plans from 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023 and 2024, every single one of them mentions cracking down on fentanyl. One of them, from about four years ago, actually talks about bringing in legislation to ban precursors.

Since the 2019 departmental plan came out, 41,000 Canadians have died from the fentanyl scourge, yet every year we hear the same thing: “We're going to do something, we're going to do something, we're going to do something.” However, nothing has been done.

Why would Canadians believe the government is actually going to do something when its own plans and papers for five or six years have been saying it is going to do something but it has done nothing?

[Peter Fonseca, Liberal, Mississauga East—Cooksville, ON]

Madam Speaker, I have a great deal of respect for the hon. colleague across the aisle, but he would know that when his party was in government, it was cutting services at our borders. It was looking at trimming everywhere, taking away those opportunities. The precursors change regularly. That is why we need to stay on top of them.

I know my colleague will look for what is in the best interest of his residents and his constituents. What is in their best interest is to vote in favour of this legislation to make sure that it passes through this House so we can bring in more measures to keep our communities safe and secure.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Madam Speaker, I echo the comments that have been made welcoming you back to the chair.

I am pleased to have the opportunity to rise to speak to this important piece of legislation, Bill C-2, an act respecting certain measures relating to the security of the border between Canada and the United States and respecting other related security measures. Finally, after a decade of inaction and repeated failures, the Liberals have tabled a so-called strong borders act, which gives the appearance of taking border security more seriously. However, the fact is that this legislation is packed with measures that Canadians did not ask for. It is a travesty that the government has allowed so many problems to fester for so long and cause so much damage to Canadians.

This sweeping piece of legislation, which the government claims will strengthen our border, protect Canada's sovereignty and keep Canadians safe, amends the following acts: the Customs Act; the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, to add fentanyl to schedule V; the Canada Post Corporation Act; the Oceans Act; the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act; the Department of Citizenship and Immigration Act; the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act; the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions Act; and the Sex Offender Information Registration Act. It also introduces the supporting authorized access to information act, which is one to pay attention to.

For years, the Liberals, knowing we had severe problems at our border with the United States, dragged their feet on addressing any of the issues. In fact, they even lashed out at law-abiding Canadians when they raised concerns about the rise in gun crimes under the Liberal government in the hopes that the Liberals would crack down on criminals and illegal firearms. Instead, the government started targeting law-abiding firearms owners and treated them as if they were dangerous criminals who needed to be dealt with. We all knew that illegal firearms being smuggled across the border to be used by street gangs were what needed to be dealt with. The government needed to stop illegal firearms from crossing the border so they could not be used to rob, injure or kill Canadians.

What did the Liberals do instead? Old habits die hard. The government doubled down on hunters and sport shooters. Sport shooters are now often turned around at the border, and even if they go through the exhaustive paperwork, jumping through all the hoops, they often have equipment wrongfully seized, which takes them months to get back. In the meantime, illegal firearms stream across the border, where CBSA agents, already understaffed, are stretched thin trying to slow the flow.

After a decade of Liberal governance, gun-related crime is up 116%, and 85% of gun offences are committed using illegal firearms from the United States. Canadian security services have also identified 350 organized crime rings operating within our borders, 63 of which have international connections to China, Mexico and other nations.

The Conservatives would like to see the Liberals scrap their failed gun buyback program, which, over four years and $67 million later, has failed to get a single gun off the streets, and redirect this money into stopping illegal firearms from entering the country. That way, the government can target criminals rather than law-abiding Canadians.

After years of the CBSA and Conservatives calling for more resources at the border to combat the multitude of trafficking that occurs, the government had another bright idea: It purchased two Black Hawk helicopters to patrol the border and stop smugglers. On the surface, the purchase of new equipment seems good, but in practical terms, it was another Liberal nothingburger. Our border with the United States is just under 8,900 kilometres. Having two helicopters to cover that large of a distance, even if they are both working at the same time, is a ludicrous proposition. Instead of hiring more CBSA agents to help staunch the flow of illegal firearms and drugs, the Liberals have spent millions of dollars to lease these helicopter for a few months.

The work of our border agents has been continually hampered by the Liberal government, as it has refused to recognize where and what the problems are. The government has been asked repeatedly by border agents, their unions and other Canadians with common sense to give more resources to the CBSA so it can properly staff border crossings and deal with the crime at the border.

While the Liberals would have us believe that there is finally some movement on addressing the serious issues at the border, we must remember that most of the issues were created or exacerbated by 10 years of Liberal incompetence and inaction. The reality is that the Liberals, with the help of their NDP partner, lost control of the border and scrambled to act only when warnings from another country came calling for them to fix their disastrous broken border policy.

As I mentioned earlier, the bill is sweeping legislation. I note that the Liberals have adopted some of the Conservative stance to strengthen border security and crack down on criminals. The government has promised that it will invest $300 million in border investigation and scanners; this is welcome news. Conservatives have been calling, for years, for more resources for our agents at the border to stem the flow of illegal firearms and drugs.

Only 1% of shipping containers are inspected coming into our country, allowing drugs and guns to sneak through in the other 99%. However, true to form, the government has offered no timeline for when the investment would be made and the resources would reach the border. The Liberal track record of making funding announcements and then sitting back and assuming someone else is going to do the job has shown a lack of transparency and trustworthiness. This brings into question the government’s ability to execute on this promise.

Additionally, the past 10 years have shown that the Liberals always find a way to make funding commitments work best for their friends and Liberal insiders. We only need to look back at what happened during COVID, when the Liberal government handed a $237-million contract to its former MP, colleague, and future leadership candidate, Frank Baylis. While that was an obvious conflict of interest, the Liberals pressed on with the contract for ventilators, claiming they were necessary. Then, just a few years later, it quietly came to light that the government had sold the ventilators for pennies on the dollar for scrap. However, it did not matter, because yet another Liberal insider got to pad his pockets.

Another example is the arrive scam scandal. The Liberals seized the opportunity of a crisis to spend at least $60 million on a simple app. After a study at committee and reviews by the procurement ombudsman and the Auditor General, it was clear that the government had funnelled money to fraudulent consultants with no care as to how much it was spending. Last, I want to point to the example of McKinsey, a company that got special access to government contracts because its managing partner at the time, Dominic Barton, was personal friends with Justin Trudeau. McKinsey made $100 million from that relationship, which, again, was found by the Auditor General to be improper. This is why it is so difficult to take the government at its word.

Each one of these procurements was justified as necessary by the government at the time, and each one was plagued by corruption and incompetence.

If we fast-forward to today, the government is promising to spend $300 million on a large procurement project in the midst of a crisis, and I have huge reservations about trusting its judgment when it comes to who those millions of dollars will go to. Will it be another former Liberal MP? Will it be another friend of the prime minister? We have seen the reports that Brookfield firms reached out to the Prime Minister just days after he took office. Will one of these firms receive contracts for the new border initiative?

Another issue with large procurements is that we know that the Prime Minister has financial holdings in companies that he has failed to disclose to Canadians, so it is possible that when these initiatives cross his desk, there may be certain companies that will be looked upon more favourably. Without knowing which companies the Prime Minister has a financial interest in, it is difficult to scrutinize the government spending that he approves. That is why I hope the Prime Minister will disclose his assets sooner rather than later so Canadians can hold his government to account for any favouritism that may be shown in the procurement process.

Along with the bill, we need to see movement on bail and sentencing reform. Many of the issues at the border originate in our cities. Over the past 10 years, there has been a drastic increase in crime across the country. The fentanyl crisis has found a home here in Canada under the Liberal government. Fentanyl superlabs are being set up to ship the deadly drug across Canada and abroad. These superlabs have flourished under the Liberals' watch.

Over the past nine years, over 49,000 Canadians have died from opioid overdose. Despite this number, the Prime Minister has claimed that it is not a crisis but just a challenge. This crisis needs to be addressed, both at the border and in our cities, to combat the flow of fentanyl and its ingredients, which are coming primarily from China and Mexico. By stemming the flow of the ingredients at the border, we can alleviate some of the pressure on our police forces across the country, which are dealing with this crisis.

While measures for the border are needed to crack down on the smuggling of illegal firearms and drugs, we also need to address the issue that is stretching our police forces thin: easy-to-get-bail laws. In 2022, 256 people were killed by someone out on bail. This constitutes 29% of all homicides committed that year. Liberal catch-and-release policies have devastated communities across Canada. We are in desperate need of bail reform, which Conservatives have been calling for for years.

Recently, the Liberals finally admitted their mistake and have agreed that the Conservative push for bail reform is the only way forward. In the throne speech, the Liberals stated, “The Government will bring a renewed focus on car theft and home invasions by toughening the Criminal Code to make bail harder to get for repeat offenders charged with committing these crimes, along with human trafficking and drug smuggling.”

While we have numerous examples of the Liberals' plagiarizing the Conservative platform, one measure that we would encourage them to undertake is adopting our position on bail reform. The past 10 years of soft-on-crime policies and easy bail for violent repeat offenders has caused untold misery across Canada. While it cannot undo the past 10 years of tragedies, the government can alleviate some of the pressure on our police forces by making bail more difficult to get for repeat violent offenders. By keeping these criminals in jail rather than letting them back out onto the street within hours of their arrest, our police would be able to better serve their communities since they would not keep getting calls to deal with the same offenders.

Repeat violent offenders deserve jail, not bail. It is time the Liberals put victims first instead of the criminals who victimized them. I look forward to the day when the government adopts and implements more Conservative policies regarding crime so Canadians can once again live on safe streets and in safe communities.

There are already concerns around privacy being raised regarding the bill. It is always a concern for Canadians when the government asks for sweeping new powers in a large omnibus bill, particularly powers that deal with their privacy and appear to infringe on it. One area that has raised concerns is the section of the bill which would amend the Canada Post Corporation Act.

By planning to broaden the ability of the government to open mail, outside the current restrictions held within the Canada Post Corporation Act, the Customs Act, and the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act, the government is causing deep concern and anxiety among Canadians about their privacy. The government must ensure that strict rules remain in place and must provide a more comprehensive response as to when this would be justifiable. As my colleague asked earlier today, is this charter-compliant?

Additionally, part 14 of the bill, which would amend the Criminal Code to allow access to basic information from public service providers, would permit peace officers to access certain data without a warrant, and it would relax warrant requirements and streamline data collection. This has come under serious scrutiny as experts have raised concerns about the impact on the privacy of Canadians that it would have. The government must continue its consultations on privacy issues that are being raised with the bill to ensure that innocent Canadians do not have their privacy breached.

I look forward to more robust debate on the bill and to the committee study that will follow. We all know that Canadians are counting on us in this place to make the changes needed to secure our border. After 10 years of mismanagement and a porous border, it is time for the government to reverse its disastrous policies. It is time for it to take border security seriously. Conservatives ran on a promise to secure the border, and we are prepared to support tougher measures, especially those that address the myriad issues created by the past decade of Liberal failures.

As I said, I do look forward to the rest of the debate on the bill, and I look forward to when the bill is referred to committee and the committee undertakes a comprehensive review of the study to see what amendments may come forward in order to address the gaps that often accompany a bill introduced by the government.

[Ruby Sahota, Liberal, Secretary of State (Combatting Crime)]

Madam Speaker, I know that the member cares deeply about this issue. I hope she will support the piece of legislation, as it has been endorsed by many of our policing agencies as being important legislation.

One organization I would like to mention in particular is the Canadian Centre for Child Protection. It has stated that the “proposed changes by the federal government...would reduce barriers Canadian police face when investigating the growing number of online crimes against children”. We have the full support of that organization, which has stated, and as we know today, that cybercrimes have evolved at a pace that government has not been able to keep up with.

I wonder whether the member would agree with that, whether she finds that subscriber information and data privacy issues are really important, and whether it is really important to make these changes so we can keep up with the criminals.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Madam Speaker, while I do not live in a border community, I know that the issues that stem from not having a secure border are far-reaching across our country. There are myriad issues that need to be addressed. As I stated in my speech, the bill would amend nine acts and introduce a new one. It is a large omnibus bill with many different aspects that would have knock-on effects. As always, the devil is in the details.

It is important that we have a robust debate and study the bill intensely at the proper committee. Concerns have been raised about the bill, and I am sure will continue to be raised as more people are consulted and review the legislation. I look forward to hearing what the results of those consultations are.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

Madam Speaker, I salute my colleague and congratulate her on her re-election.

Under the Harper government, there were plans to cut the number of officers at the border. That is what it says in CBSA's 2015 report on plans and priorities. Now that the Conservative Party is in opposition, it seems to have taken the opposite position. They agree that we need more staff to have more security at the borders.

I would like my colleague to simply explain to me why it was a priority to reduce staff when the Conservative Party was in government, but now that they are in opposition, they agree with increasing staff.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Madam Speaker, I disagree with the premise of that question. Conservatives have always been concerned with security at our border. We have long been calling for decisive action to protect Canada's borders, and we continue to do so.

The government has been in government for 10 years, and it took 10 years for it to introduce this piece of legislation. We know that it is coming at the eleventh hour and that time is of the essence in order to get the legislation through the House and potentially passed.

I do understand that the Liberals would like this to happen quickly, but we are not going to rush this. We are going to take the time to look at the legislation to make sure that it addresses all the issues that need to be addressed. It will get the scrutiny it deserves.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, the election was on April 28. We have a new Prime Minister and a new government. This is bill number two, the very first piece of legislation.

Now, if the member wants to reflect on past governments, I remember that it was Stephen Harper who actually cut hundreds of millions of dollars for border control, not to mention the border control officers who were cut from the system. She was a part of that government. The bill before us would do the absolute opposite of what Stephen Harper did, and she knows that.

My question is very simple: Will the member join with the Canadian Police Association, which represents thousands of law enforcement officers on the street today who are in support of the legislation? Will the Conservative Party support the legislation today and see it go to committee sooner as opposed to later?

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Madam Speaker, there it is: exactly what I said in response to the previous question.

The Liberals want us to believe that they are new, a new Prime Minister and new government, but they are not. They have been in power for 10 years and did nothing to address the issues regarding border security. They keep hearkening back to a decade ago. They have had a decade to do what needed to be done, to do what Canadians have been calling on them to do.

As I have stated, I know the Liberals want to ram the legislation through. As in many cases in the past, the imperative is created, and we have to get it done because they did not get it done over the last 10 years.

[Frank Caputo, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Nicola, BC]

Madam Speaker, it is always a pleasure to rise on behalf of the people from Kamloops—Thompson—Nicola.

Before I begin, I want to recognize a young man named Jasper Phillips, who recently received the Chief Scout's Award for fundraising for robotics kits of over $1,000. We thank him for his service.

I always really enjoy speaking with my hon. colleague. I was just looking at a report from Staff Sergeant Josh Roda of the Merritt RCMP, a community of 7,000. Staff Sergeant Roda reported that the Merritt RCMP have already seized 69 firearms this year, two just this last month, with one being a sawed-off shotgun. This is what we need to address, in my view. The bill would do none of that. Would my hon. colleague agree?

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Madam Speaker, the hon. member has been very instrumental in reviewing this piece of legislation, and I absolutely agree with his observations. We have heard more stories like the one he just cited for us in this place. The government needs to ensure that the legislation is going to be robust, and, as opposition, we are going to do the same in addressing the concerns that he just cited.

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Madam Speaker, it is really troubling to me that the Liberal government is trying to push through an omnibus bill of over 120 pages. I am wondering if the member agrees with me that perhaps we need to push the government to ensure that we can look at the legislation separately and get it out of an omnibus bill.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Madam Speaker, I do agree with my colleague.

Despite the title of the bill, as I mentioned in my speech, it would go beyond its stated aim to secure our borders. It is a sweeping piece of legislation that stretches far beyond immigration, national security and securing our borders, and I do think it is an attempt to use the guise of border security to push through other unrelated measures and that the Liberals are hoping Canadians are not paying attention.

I would suggest that, as consultations are undertaken when the bill is referred to committee, each member of that committee, and certainly the opposition, should be calling for time to review this piece of legislation, every piece of it, in order to make sure that it addresses the concerns for which it is intended.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Madam Speaker, before I give my question, I want to put something to rest, I hope once and for all.

We have heard the member for Winnipeg North and others repeat the same false narrative about everything being okay that they have not done in the last 10 years because of Harper's cuts. I would like him, the Liberals and everyone in this House to take a look at the public accounts. These are non-partisan numbers put forward by the government. These are real numbers on spending.

Adjusted for Liberal inflation, the Liberals are actually spending $200 million less on CBSA than when they took over, so the government should actually end that false narrative, stop misinforming Canadians and actually start spouting the truth about what is going on at the border.

I wonder if my colleague could answer this: Why does she think the government is pushing a false narrative instead of answering important questions today on this debate about the border bill?

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the attention that the member pays to the financial reports. I know that numbers do not lie, and I agree with him that it is time the Liberals came clean and admitted to their failures of the last 10 years.