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 .

Public Safety

[Jacques Ramsay, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety]

Mr. Speaker, fentanyl is ravaging our communities and tearing families apart. That is a well-known fact. Bill C‑2 will step up the fight against fentanyl trafficking through important measures such as tighter controls on the chemical precursors used to manufacture fentanyl and enhanced powers for law enforcement to intercept and search shipments suspected of containing illegal drugs. We have also designated drug cartels as terrorist organizations. We will always be there to protect Canadians.

Motions in Amendment

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, as my colleague has pointed out, it deals with fentanyl too, a very serious issue here in Canada. In fact, around the world, fentanyl is a serious issue. As a government, we are looking at ways in which we can protect Canadians, and that is Bill C-2, not to mention Bill C-4.

Bill C-4 is the legislation that would put into law the tax cut for Canadians. Contrary to what the Conservatives are saying, it would be a substantial tax cut through which people would realize, in a fiscal year, over $800, for an average family with two workers in the home. They could get up to $840, I believe. It is a significant amount of money. There are 22 million taxpayers who would benefit by that—

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I would hope that members opposite would be somewhat more respectful when members are speaking.

At the end of the day, when the voters spoke on April 28, they sent a very strong message to all members of the House that the Prime Minister, the leader of the Liberal Party of Canada, had a mandate to build one economy instead of the 13 that we currently have in the country, and that is what the legislation is all about.

If we look at the election platform on page 1, if we look at the throne speech and if we look at the announcements made by the Prime Minister, we will see that the primary focus is to build one strong, healthy economy. The strongest economy in the G7 is the goal; that is something that the Prime Minister and Liberal members of Parliament are four-square behind. The focus of the government has been to enhance and build on that theme, and that is why we have Bill C-5 before us today, because the people of Canada were concerned about the economy, jobs and the direction that we were going in.

There is a new Prime Minister and a new administration, with a focus on building our economy. When we think in terms of trade and in terms of opportunities, there is a special focus in regard to exploring ways in which we can trade with other countries around the world, expanding our opportunities.

We have a Prime Minister who, just over two weeks ago, met with all the first ministers, all the premiers of provinces and territories across the country, about the idea of building the one Canadian economy. There have been provinces that have taken initiatives to build upon that. We have to be able to demonstrate here on the floor of the House of Commons that we are listening to what Canadians want and to their expectations. Their expectations are that there would be a high sense of co-operation, political parties aside, focused on what is in the best interest of Canadians, and that is exactly what our new Prime Minister has done.

We met with first ministers of all political stripes. When meeting with indigenous leaders and with all the different stakeholders to date, the first priority has been Canadians and building our economy. That is what we are striving to do. Imagine April 28 to six or seven weeks later; look at what we have been able to accomplish in that very short period of time. We can talk about legislative measures, such as Bill C-5, which we are talking about today, which in essence captures the one Canadian economy by looking at special projects and encouraging labour mobility, in law.

We also have Bill C-2, which is to strengthen our borders. It is a tangible investment, not only from a legislative perspective but also from a budgetary perspective, where we would commit to 1,000 more CBSA officers and 1,000 more RCMP officers. This would have a real impact on making our borders that much more secure, dealing with issues such as extortion and illegal immigration of different forms. These are the types of things—

Citizenship Act

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I am being heckled. Members are saying, “Well, the NDP is not in government.” I do not know why the Liberals would just support their bill. It is completely strange.

Here is the thing: We do not know how many people the bill would affect. The government could not say, over a 10-, 20- or 30-year period, how many people would be able to draw health care benefits in Canada, draw on the services of our country.

We asked the Parliamentary Budget Officer. Again, he was kind of stonewalled in his analysis on the government, because I do not think it wants the public to know. I think the government knows how many people this could impact. Earlier my colleague said there is about four million people currently living abroad that have Canadian citizenship. We could start thinking about the exponential downstream impact the bill would have. The Parliamentary Budget Officer said that at a minimum it is going to be 100,000 people over five years. That is his best guess.

Why would the Liberals propose a bill that would essentially allow mass chain migration to this country through automatic Canadian citizenship without any sort of substantive tie to the country? It really does speak to motive. Why are they doing this? They could have kept the Conservative bill with just a minimal scope, but no. They did this on purpose, and they have now done it twice. Instead of making amendments to the bill as were required, they have now done this twice.

There are two things that are missing in the bill that absolutely, 100%, need to be instantly changed. The first is that missing requirement of a substantial connection to Canada. I mentioned, in questions and answers, that the court ruling some of this applied to, which the Conservative bill and not the government tried to address, had a requirement or a definition for a substantial connection to Canada. How have the Liberals defined that? There is nothing. We heard that in the non-answer of the colleague who spoke just before. She could not really define that.

What we need is a substantial connection to Canada. Precedent for this type of situation in virtually every other country around the world is something like five or 10 years in a set period of time. Earlier my colleague from the Bloc asked if it would stop somebody from leaving Canada. It is usually five or more years within seven years, and at least a chunk of that is spent in the country as an adult, over the age of 14 or over the age of 16. That point was brought up in the hours of debate, with witness after witness giving testimony in the last Parliament.

The Liberals could have harmonized that with other jurisdictions around the world, but instead they purposefully tabled a bill with that missing. I think that they did that because, again, they want to have a devaluation of the Canadian citizenship. Let us think about it; it is literally like devaluing currency. If they want to refute me on this point, this should be their response: It should be that they will entertain an amendment to have a consecutive residency requirement, as a bare minimum amendment. That is what I think. That makes sense to me.

The second thing that the bill absolutely needs amended is the fact that there is no security vetting requirement whatsoever for somebody applying for this. Let us think about what that means. If somebody looks up their ancestral food chain and finds an ancestor who held Canadian citizenship, even though that person has never been in the country, they could come, three years over some period of the course of their life, and then be granted Canadian citizenship without having been vetted for any sort of security risk whatsoever. There is an automatic get-into-Canada pass with the bill, and that is not right.

I want to talk about fairness too because there are millions and millions of positive stories. Many people who now work and serve other Canadians in this place have migrated to Canada, played by the rules and played fair through Canada's immigration system. They checked all the boxes, waited for years, had security tests and had all of these different tests. I cannot imagine how they feel looking at this bill. It is not right, and it is not fair.

Again, I want to be very clear: I think one of the things that Canadians have always been proud of, and are proud of and open to today, is the concept of immigration that functions within the context of the pluralism of Canada. That does not work under what the Liberal government has done, which is increase immigration to a level that is so unsustainable that we do not have houses, we do not have health care and we do not have jobs to adequately address everybody in the country, newcomer or not.

I think what has happened here is the Liberals have tabled the bill without amendments, partially because of an incompetent minister. However, they have also put the bill forward without amendments because they put Bill C-2 in place. They broke Canada's asylum system so badly that they had to put the immigration provisions of Bill C-2 in there. That is another debate. I will have a lot to say on that in the future.

There are people, “consultants” in loose quotations, who have made an entire industry of scamming people who want to come to Canada to build a better life. I think the Liberals are afraid to stand up to those people. I think what they try to do is talk out of both sides of their mouth on this issue. That is why the bill came in unamended.

If the Liberals had come in with a bill with a narrow scope that looked a lot like our colleague's bill from the other place, in which she had very tight definitions to address the very real needs of some of the stakeholders who are considered lost Canadians, everybody could have supported that. It would have been fast-tracked. However, the Liberals and the former NDP members stalled the bill at committee because they gutted it and then made it this endless chain migration bill.

I need to hear from the government that it is going to amend the bill so that there is a substantive presence test that includes some sort of consecutive presence, as well as, at a minimum, security vetting for people this would apply to. The government has not signalled that, and every Canadian should be asking why. Conservatives will continue to press the Liberals on this issue because we will not let Canadian citizenship be devalued by poor Liberal legislation and the poor Liberal broken immigration system.

Concurrence in Vote 1—Department of Canadian Heritage

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

Mr. Speaker, I would like to share a number of thoughts, particularly with the members opposite. This is important for people who follow the debate of the estimates. It is a very important debate that is actually taking place.

We often make reference to our having a new Prime Minister, a new administration and a government that truly understand the economy. There are 8.5 million Canadians from coast to coast to coast who have supported the Prime Minister and the Liberal Party, which is a record number of votes in the history of Canada.

Ultimately, I think it is important that we respond to the mandate that we have been given in a very aggressive yet positive fashion. We need to work hard for Canadians and co-operate where we can with opposition parties, in anticipation that opposition parties will also co-operate with the government at times, as they have demonstrated to a certain degree already. I will get into more of those details, but suffice it to say that there has been a change in government, the Prime Minister and the administration. An example would be the consumer price on carbon. The Conservatives called it the carbon tax. It is now gone. We have a new Prime Minister, and that policy is now gone.

We now have a Prime Minister who has brought in legislation through the cabinet and caucus to deal with issues such as border control through Bill C-2. We could talk about the tax break, Bill C-4. We could talk about the one Canadian economy, Bill C-5. We could talk about what the Prime Minister has done since April 28, over and above that substantial legislation and over and above the estimates that have been provided in the ways and means. We can talk about, for example, the first ministers' meetings that have taken place. We could talk about the G7 conference that is taking place today, not to mention the many other initiatives where we have seen the new Prime Minister tackle the issue of building Canada strong, elbows up. Damn right.

I believe that we have a Prime Minister who does have his elbows up going at it, dealing with the different issues that are before Canadians today, with an objective of building the strongest, healthiest economy in the G7. That is the goal, and I believe we will be able to achieve that goal. Now, we are very much, given the minority situation, going to be looking for a co-operating partner. Today it might be the Conservatives, while tomorrow it might be the Bloc. That is possible. It could even be some of the independents, but at the end of the day, we are going to continue to move on important initiatives to build the economy.

Before I go into the details on that, I want to talk about something that has been referenced by the Prime Minister: our social programs. I have always been a very strong advocate on the issue of health care. I do not say that lightly because, since I was first elected in 1988 to the Manitoba legislature, I have had the opportunity to play many different roles. Since I came to Ottawa in 2010 as a member of Parliament, one of the consistent issues has been health care. It seems to have always been one of the top three issues over the past 35-plus years. I truly believe it is a part of our Canadian identity. It is one of the reasons why many people feel passionate about saying, “I am a Canadian.”

One of the shared values we have is our health care system. I am a nationalist in the sense that I believe that individuals, no matter where they live in Canada, should have access to a very basic level of health care services throughout the nation. That is why it is important that we support and get behind the Canada Health Act. That is why health care transfers are so critically important. The federal government does have a role, a significant role, to play in health care in Canada.

I was glad when the Justin Trudeau administration, of which I was a part, put such a strong emphasis on health care and providing health care services through issues such as long-term care and mental health; the creation of the true national pharmacare program, or at least the beginning of one; and the advancement of the dental care program, something I think we should be looking at ways we could ultimately be improving still.

Having said that, I want to go to what the Prime Minister has been so focused on. We can review the last election and look at election night. I hear a lot from my friends in the Bloc, who said that all that people wanted to talk about was the Trump factor, the trade and the tariffs, and that this was the reason the Bloc lost all the seats in the province of Quebec. I think the result was 44 Liberals, 22 Bloc members and 11 Conservatives. We had a substantial increase, but the province of Quebec was not alone; there were 8.5 million votes, and every province in the country has Liberal members of Parliament.

I can tell members that it did not matter where we went in the country, people were genuinely concerned, and that concern was addressed in a very tangible way by the Liberal Party of Canada, in particular by the Prime Minister of Canada. I reflect on the election, and one of the very first announcements, which, if it was not on day one of the election, it was shortly thereafter. The Prime Minister indicated that he was going to give a tax break to Canadians. By the way, that promise was kept, and I will get to that point, but shortly after and throughout, he also amplified the issue of Trump trade tariffs and the impact that they were going to have on Canada.

I believe that Canadians saw a contrast between the Prime Minister, the current leader of the Liberal Party, during the campaign, and Pierre Poilievre, and what they saw in the Prime Minister was an individual who had a background in dealing with the economy. He was appointed by a Conservative prime minister to be the Governor of the Bank of Canada. He was appointed to the Bank of England, again as the governor. The leader of the Liberal Party, the Prime Minister of Canada, has a history of working with and developing an economy, and when Canadians looked at that and compared it to what the Conservative Party was offering, I not only believe that they made the right decision, but I also believe that it was in the best interest of Canadians.

Shortly after the election, we saw the Prime Minister take on the issues and put things into place in the form of legislation and budget measures. I will cite one of the best budget measures coming from the Prime Minister, which was announced just last week: the 2% of GDP for the Canadian forces. How long have we waited for a prime minister to not only actually make the commitment but also to realize it in the form of a budget, which we will be seeing later this year? “Patience is a virtue”, they say. The budget will be before us, and we are going to see the 2% of the GDP.

If members flash back to the time Pierre Poilievre sat in the cabinet of Stephen Harper, it was borderline 1%, or maybe even a little less than 1%, of the GDP. In the following administration, Justin Trudeau did increase it substantially.

For the first time in generations, we can now say that Canada is going to be living up to the United Nations target of 2%, which is a significant budget achievement.

We can also take a look in terms of the other actions that this new Prime Minister and government have put into place.

We talked about border controls, and we now have Bill C-2 before us, which will be complemented by an additional 1,000 CBSA officers along with another 1,000 RCMP law enforcement officers. The legislation would even improve the strength of our border, which is something we talked about during the campaign. The campaign ended April 28, and we now have legislation before us to be able to deal with the election platform. Again, we would think that members opposite would see the true value. They are a little slow on Bill C-2, but I will not push them too hard on that. At the end of the day, I know in my heart that this is substantial legislation that will ultimately make a positive difference, especially if we contrast it to the days in which Pierre Poilievre sat around the cabinet table with Stephen Harper, and they actually cut border control officers, cut money from our borders and the safety of our borders. It is an amazing contrast.

We can advance to yet another piece of legislation, Bill C-4, which would primarily do three things. First, it would provide the 2% tax break that the Prime Minister committed to during the election. Second, it would provide, for first-time homebuyers, the elimination of GST on a home of up to $1 million, which does a couple of things in itself. It would make it more affordable for young people to actually purchase a home, and, ultimately, it would assist in increasing Canada's housing stock at the same time. Again, I could draw the comparison of when Pierre Poilievre sat around that cabinet table. In fact, he was actually the minister of housing. How did he do on the housing file? Well, everyone knows he was challenged to build six houses, and as I have said in the past, we still do not know where those six houses were, but we are told that there were actually six houses. Contrast is really quite surprising. However, third, the bill would ultimately take out of law the consumer price on pollution, which is a substantial piece of legislation, again from April 28. This is legislation that should pass.

Let us fast-forward to another piece of legislation that we have had a great deal of discussion on: Bill C-5, the one Canadian economy act. It should be no surprise to anyone in this House that the government has made that legislation a priority. From my perspective, it was the number one priority for the Prime Minister of Canada during the campaign. It provides assurances to Canadians that, as a government and a Prime Minister, we are going to push, and push hard, to build a stronger, healthier one Canadian economy by taking down those federal barriers before July 1. It was a solid commitment that was provided by the Prime Minister. I appreciate the fact that my friends in the Conservative Party actually recognize that, because without the support of at least one other party or some independents, we would not be able to pass Bill C-5, and that has been made abundantly clear by my friends in the Bloc.

It does not take much to prevent legislation from passing. Time allocation and closure motions are tools used at times in order to be able to get something through the House, because often there is no commitment to seeing it pass. If we listened to the Bloc members, that bill would never pass, so we had to bring in closure. The Bloc then says doing that is anti-democratic and is not parliamentary. We are a minority government and cannot do it alone.

Fortunately, the Conservatives were also listening to Canadians in all regions and recognized that it was an important piece of legislation. If they would like to see amendments to it, that is fine, but at the end of the day, Bill C-5 is a reflection of what Canadians expect of this Parliament. I am disappointed in my friends in the Bloc.

Take a look at what the Prime Minister has done. I made reference to the fact that there was a first ministers meeting two weeks ago, where the Prime Minister sat with premiers of the different provinces and territories and had a thorough discussion about identifying national projects that would advance Canadian interests. Even the Province of Quebec participated in that. Each province has projects. I can recall the Prime Minister asking what those national projects were and soliciting opinions and thoughts on them.

As opposed to potentially filibustering the bill, the Bloc could have actually contributed by talking about the many things that could assist the Province of Quebec through a national perspective. For example, hydro is something that could ultimately help not only my own province of Manitoba in terms of grids but also the Province of Quebec. I would suggest there are other potential projects there that need to be talked about and brought to the attention of the administration, to the premiers and the Prime Minister so that we can develop those projects.

I think of things such as the Port of Churchill and the potential of rail, and, absolutely, pipelines matter. There are issues we can take on as national projects and advance them. Bill C-5 is an important piece of legislation.

In a very short period of time, we have seen a Prime Minister who understands what Canadians want and developed a platform that highlights the legislation we introduced and that highlighted many of the budgetary allocations that are already starting to go out. The budget will be coming out in the fall, but it will be a budget that reflects Canadian interests and the direction this Prime Minister, the cabinet and the Liberal caucus want us to move forward on, which is based on listening to what our constituents are telling us. It is a true reflection of what Canadians want.

We are going to continue to build a country that is second to no other in the G7 in strength and economic power on a per capita basis. This is something that can be achieved. All we need is to continue to work together, where we can, to develop those ideas. When an idea is sound and good, I suspect it will receive a very positive outcome. It might take some time, but at least let us talk about those issues. We can, in fact, make a difference.

To conclude, I look forward to the questions that might be asked.

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

Madam Speaker, the member says that he wants to see specific actions. A specific action would be Bill C-2, which deals with borders. Specific actions would be dealing with giving a tax cut to Canadians, having one Canadian economy, meeting with the different premiers, and hosting a G7 summit. We have a very proactive, aggressive Prime Minister who believes in hard work, and we are seeing the results today.

I am wondering whether the member would not agree that this is actually action. That is more than words, and there are a lot more words and action to follow.

Justice

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

Mr. Speaker, this new government was given a strong mandate from Canadians to keep our communities safe, and we will do exactly that.

We are committed to hiring 1,000 new CBSA officers and 1,000 more RCMP personnel to secure our borders and to keep our streets safe. We will make it tougher for violent criminals to get bail and impose stricter sentences for repeat violent offenders. This government is acting quickly. We brought in Bill C-2 immediately, to provide police with the tools necessary to catch criminals.

Consideration of Government Business No. 1

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

Mr. Speaker, what a privilege it is to rise in this House today on behalf of the people of Mississauga East—Cooksville. It is a pivotal time for our country and for Canadian families alike.

I would like to congratulate all the dads out there for a belated happy Father's Day. They do a great job.

Canadians sent us here with a clear message to make life more affordable, to make our economy work for everyone and to bring this country together stronger, fairer and more united than ever before. That is exactly what our government is doing. When I speak with a young couple in Mississauga trying to buy their first home, a small grocer who wants to expand their business across provincial lines or a retired couple feeling the pressure at the checkout line, one thing is clear: Canadians are looking for action and not slogans. They are getting that action through bold, focused leadership under our Prime Minister and our new government.

This is not just about responding to challenges; it is about seizing the opportunity. Today, all eyes are on Kananaskis, Alberta, as Canada hosts the G7 summit. This is a moment to showcase what makes Canada strong: our resilient middle class, our clean and conventional energy leadership, and our commitment to building a modern, unified economy where no one is left behind. We will stand on the global stage and show the world that Canada is not just keeping up; we are leading.

Here at home, we are moving quickly to deliver real relief for Canadians. Bill C-4, now before this House, delivers on the 2025 campaign promise to cut taxes for the middle class, reducing the lowest tax bracket. That would mean more money in the pockets of 22 million Canadians, up to $840 a year for a two-income family. This relief would start on July 1, so the time to act is now. Families cannot afford delay; they need this support and they need it now.

We are not stopping there. We are tackling the housing crisis with a targeted GST exemption for first-time homebuyers on homes up to $1 million. This would be especially impactful for families in cities like mine of Mississauga. We are helping young Canadians enter the housing market while investing in housing supply to make sure the next generation has the same shot at success.

This past weekend, I had the honour to attend a Luso charities event, which raises vital funds for individuals living with cognitive disabilities. What stood out to me was not just the generosity in that room, which was tremendous, but that there were developers, union leaders and construction workers. People from every corner of the building sector came together for a common purpose.

Do members know what they told me? They said they are optimistic. They believe in the direction our country is going, the way we are headed. They know that by working together with government, community, industry and labour, we can build the homes Canadians need while creating good jobs and delivering inclusive, progressive growth. This is what nation building looks like, and it starts with partnership. This is what it means to build fairness.

Now let me speak about trade, infrastructure and opportunity, because these issues are deeply connected. It was a busy weekend this weekend. I also had the pleasure of attending North America's biggest halal food festival, right in the heart of Mississauga. Fifty thousand people came out, including families, entrepreneurs and business leaders from across our country. Amir Shamsi, the founder, took me around to speak with many of the businesses. Built from the ground up, many of them are newcomer-run, women-led or youth-run. They told me they were ready to grow. They want to move their products across provincial borders and access new markets abroad, but right now they are hitting red tape, different standards, fragmented rules and unnecessary costs. We need to fix that.

That is why Bill C-5, the one Canadian economy act, is so important. It is vital that we do this. The bill tears down those barriers, creating one unified marketplace across Canada. It helps small and medium-sized businesses, like those at the halal food festival, expand faster, hire more workers and compete globally.

Trade policy is not enough. Nation-building infrastructure is the backbone that supports our economic growth. That is why Bill C-5, the one Canadian economy act, would help unleash strategic trade and energy corridors, projects that connect our natural resources to markets, our businesses to ports, and our goods to global demand.

We need to modernize Canada's ports, from Halifax to Vancouver, to handle large volumes and higher efficiency. We need to expand rail and highway infrastructure to reduce congestion and speed up delivery. We need to build clean energy corridors that will move electricity across provinces, so that Canadian power can fuel our homes, our factories and our vehicles from coast to coast to coast. This is how we unlock the full potential of the Canadian economy, by investing in the hard infrastructure that makes trade real. This is inclusive, bottom-up trade, where the benefits start with the people on the ground, in places like the great place of Mississauga, and ripple outward across our country.

At our borders, where economic and national security meet, we are acting with Bill C-2. The bill would modernize trade routes, strengthen enforcement and stop the illegal flow of guns and drugs, while speeding up the legal flow of goods. That is good for safety and good for business, and it is essential for a modern economy.

These are just bills, but they are all part of a unified vision, a 2025 Liberal vision, a Liberal plan that Canadians voted for: tax relief for working families; housing access for the next generation; strategic infrastructure to support trade, innovation and energy; a clean economy that grows with people-powered innovation; and a strong Canada united from coast to coast to coast.

It is a plan to build on economic expertise, empowered by the values that Canadians hold dear. We have a Prime Minister with real-world experience in global finance and public service, who held a job as the Governor of the Bank of Canada, as well as the Governor of the Bank of England. This person comes with this experience and brings us all together to a new government, a cabinet team that reflects Canada and delivers for Canadians.

Members have probably heard the announcement that Michael Sabia will be the incoming Clerk of the Privy Council. We have someone, again, who understands both business and public policy and brings those together. He has done it in Quebec. He has done it across our country. That will help. It will help as we build our team Canada.

This Canadian team, working together with all of us, and I say all of us because I speak to all members in the House, our provinces, our territories, our indigenous partners, the private sector, labour and 41 million Canadians, will unlock Canada's full economic potential. That is what real partnership and real leadership look like. What unites all of this is simple. We are focused on people: not partisanship, not posturing, but people.

This is how we restore faith in government, by showing that it can work and that it can deliver for our people. As we show the world in Kananaskis today, Canada is leading, not just with words, but with action. Let us build one economy. Let us support every family. Let us continue building a Canada that works for everyone. Let us build Canada strong.

Public Safety

[Jacques Ramsay, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety]

Mr. Speaker, the strong borders act would combat organized crime, protect the integrity of our immigration system and equip law enforcement with the tools it needs to strengthen our border. Bill C-2 would also contribute to our crackdown on fentanyl trafficking with important measures to support law enforcement, such as improving inter-agency intelligence sharing and empowering law enforcement to intercept and search shipments suspected of smuggling illegal drugs.

Business of the House

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I want to reassure my hon. colleague that there will be a government budget in the fall, which is something that all Canadians except the Conservatives seem to know. It will be an excellent budget that will invest in the Canadian economy and create opportunities from coast to coast to coast.

This afternoon, we will continue the debate on the Conservative Party's opposition day motion. In accordance with the order adopted by the House yesterday, we will have a fifth and final committee of the whole debate on the estimates later this evening for two hours. Tomorrow morning, we will start the debate on Government Business No. 1, which establishes a process to adopt Bill C-5, An Act to enact the Free Trade and Labour Mobility in Canada Act and the Building Canada Act. We will continue with this debate on Monday.

I would also like to inform the House that Tuesday will be the last designated day of this financial cycle. On Wednesday, we will resume second reading of Bill C‑2 respecting the security of the border between Canada and the United States. On Thursday, we will begin second reading debate on Bill C‑3, which amends the Citizenship Act.

Making Life More Affordable for Canadians Act

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the chance to speak to Bill C-4. First of all, I want to make a couple of observations about the legislation we are seeing in this place under the new government.

I am distressed. It may be a manageable issue, and maybe I am the only one who is noticing that almost every bill that comes before us is in omnibus form; in other words, many different bills are addressed within the same bill. Some of the issues are connected one to the other, which makes it a legitimate omnibus bill, and some seem to be for the purpose of convenience, to save the government time. For instance, in Bill C-2, the strong borders act, there are some aspects that do not really have to do with borders at all, and there is significant concern from people who are in the refugee law community, and from Amnesty International.

We are looking at Bill C-4 tonight, and I will give it more detail, but briefly, Bill C-5 should have been two different pieces of legislation. Part 1 deals with interprovincial barriers between labour mobility and recognizing different kinds of restrictions to moving goods. Part 2 is the building Canada act, which is entirely different. Part 1 has drawn attention from the Canadian Cancer Society, as it is concerned the bill may lead to a weakening of standards across the country. Meanwhile, part 2 needs massive study, appears, at least to me, to give unprecedented levels of unfettered political discretion to cabinet, and is unprecedented in its scope.

On Bill C-4, before I go to the affordability section, let me just point to the anomalous inclusion of changes to the Canada Elections Act. The Canada Elections Act and privacy concerns for Canadian citizens under the Elections Act have no connection whatsoever to affordability. However, here we have it: part 4, Canada Elections Act amendments that are similar to what we saw in the previous Parliament in Bill C-65, which I do wish had carried before we went into the last election, as it would have certainly expedited the collection of signatures for candidates and their chances of getting nominated candidates onto ballots.

This is weaker than that, but it does have some connection to what we saw in Bill C-65 in relating to restrictions on political parties' ability to save information and violate Canadians' privacy. It does not belong in an affordability act at all. We have heard at least one other MP tonight, the hon. member for Souris—Moose Mountain, mention the issue that we want to protect personal information and that privacy laws should extend to political parties.

Unusually, in Bill C-4, new subsection 446.4(1) would assert an ability for federal legislation to negate provincial privacy laws and what provincial privacy laws can say about federal political parties. That is questionable at best. It also, to me, is somewhat offensive, or very offensive I suppose, that clause 49 of part 4 of Bill C-4 deals with the date of coming into force.

Experienced members of this place who look at statutory interpretation, which we do, and I hope we all read the legislation and all bills carefully, know certainly that coming into force is usually a date in the future. A bill would pass through the House, pass through the Senate and then come into force, sometimes at a date that is certain. I have a pretty good memory. I may have forgotten that there was ever a bill like this one, but within my ability to remember everything I have ever read in legislation, I do not think I have ever seen a bill that purports to come into force 25 years before the date on which it is passed.

Members who are learning this for the first time, if they look at clause 49 of Bill C-4, will find that the date on which the bill we are discussing today, June 11, 2025, would have come into force is May 31, 2000. This would exempt federal political parties from any offences they may have committed in failing to obey provincial legislation to which we were subjected, by going all the way back, resetting the clock, to May 31, 2000.

In this place, we like time travel; let us face it. We do like seeing the clock at midnight when it is not midnight, and we can do that in this place. We can say, “Gee, I wish it were midnight. I am ready to go home. Let us all agree we see the clock at midnight.”

I do not know whether anyone has ever tried a trick like seeing the year at 25 years ago. I am worried about this, and I do not know that we will have time, but I certainly hope we will properly study Bill C-4 in committee, and maybe we can persuade the government that part 4 should be pulled apart and studied separately from the rest of the bill.

The rest of the bill is tax measures. There is only part of the tax measures I would want to address at this point, and I am cognizant of the time. I know we are coming near a point where I should close to avoid being interrupted, but I do not mind interruptions, certainly for unanimous consent motions, because I think we are unanimous on that.

However, let us just say I am probably the only remaining member of Parliament who will stand up and say that the consumer carbon price was a good idea. It is a shame to see such cowardice on all sides of the House from the parties that used to support using market mechanisms, which is actually from the right-wing tool kit invented by Republicans in Washington, D.C., of how we can reduce emissions of whatever. Air pollutants in the area around Los Angeles is one of the first places market mechanisms were used.

Carbon pricing is being accepted by economists around the world as having a more efficient economic impact, reduced transactional costs of implementing the regulatory approach. Generally, people on the right do not like regulation. That is a choice: If we are going to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases, we could use a regulatory approach. We could use the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, part 4, which already exists, and put in place regulated, required hard caps on emissions of any pollutants, thus bringing them down sharply without having to use the more complex measures of pricing.

I would rather see the consumer carbon price used as what is called, in the literature, carbon fee and dividend, in other words, maintaining pollution taxation as revenue-neutral. A key feature in good, solid gold-standard carbon pricing is that the government should not live on pollution as a source of revenue to government. We want to make sure that whatever we take in on a carbon price is rebated as efficiently as possible to those who paid it.

To the idea that we do not want to have this, I just add again that according to the commissioner of the environment and sustainable development—

Public Safety

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the so-called stronger borders act makes Harper's Bill C-51 look like child's play. Bill C-2 is a sweeping attack on Canadian civil liberties. It would allow the RCMP and CSIS to make information demands from internet providers, banks, doctors, landlords and even therapists, without judicial oversight. This is not about border security. It is about government overreach and Big Brother tactics, plain and simple. It is a violation of our privacy, and it will be challenged in court.

Will the Prime Minister do the right thing, respect the charter, and withdraw this dangerous bill?

Main Estimates and Supplementary Estimates (A), 2025-26

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Chair, that was very good; they are all the same, which emphasizes what it is that Canadians were saying at the doors, and that is one of the reasons 8.5 million Canadians voted for the Prime Minister and the Liberal candidates throughout the country. The Liberal Party was the only political party to actually get a member elected in every province.

I believe that this evening we have heard from two of the ministers who are playing a very important role. I think of the issue of international trade. In the past 10 years, we have actually had more trade agreements signed off on than in any other administration in the 40 or 50 previous years, and now there is a minister who has really taken charge of what the Prime Minister has said. The Prime Minister wants us to be able to diversify and to look at other countries and how we can increase exports.

That is why I was really encouraged, even in the off-the-cuff question I had for the Minister of International Trade, when I made reference to the Phillippines, a country I am very passionate about because I see the potential that is there and match it with some of the things the Prime Minister is talking about. There are many countries we can look at and enhance trading opportunities with. This is actually incorporated into our legislative agenda.

There is also the Minister of Finance and National Revenue, who has done a fantastic job of getting the legislation that is so critically important.

Again, in the last election, what commitment was made? To deal with the issue of affordability, the Prime Minister made it very clear that he wanted to give Canadians a tax break. That is what the Minister of Finance has been working on, bringing forward legislation that not only gives a tax break to 22 million Canadians but also brings in a first-time homebuyer tax break on the first $1 million for people who are purchasing new homes, thereby helping first-time homebuyers while at the same time encouraging and promoting housing construction.

These are two very important initiatives that complement what the Prime Minister committed to prior to the election being called, which was to cancel the carbon tax. We have a new Prime Minister with a new mandate and a new government that have brought these initiatives forward for debate and ultimately passage here in the House of Commons, as has been demonstrated this evening with the ministers presenting on the estimates, estimates that the Conservative Party voted for.

The Conservatives were not alone. Every member of Parliament voted in favour of the ways and means motion, which is the estimates, and we appreciate that vote of confidence. At the end of the day, I truly believe that what we need to do is not just give the government a vote of confidence, thereby saying, yes, we are fulfilling in part a very major aspect of the last campaign, but, as part of that, also look at the legislative agenda.

The legislative agenda does just that. It gets rid of the carbon tax in law, the consumer component. That is actually incorporated into Bill C-4. Not only does it have that aspect, but it also ensures the tax cut for 22 million taxpayers. Eliminating the GST for first-time homebuyers is also incorporated into Bill C-4.

Think about it. These are three major initiatives in the legislation, a part of the Prime Minister's campaign to deliver for Canadians. I believe that every member of the House supports it. After all, they supported and voted unanimously in favour of the ways and means motion. One would think they would support this legislation.

Why is the legislation important? It is because the tax break is to take effect on July 1, which is coming up soon. Everyone needs to be aware of that. I hope the Conservatives will recognize the value of passing that particular piece of legislation.

The good news does not stop there. The Minister of Finance talked about having the strongest economy in the G7. The Minister of Finance is not alone. The Prime Minister has been talking about that fairly extensively. We want to build that strong economy.

We can talk about Bill C-5. Bill C-5 does just that, recognizing one Canadian economy. That will make a difference. There are also the border controls in Bill C-2. These three are wraparounds to address election platform issues that every member not only should be looking at but should be getting passed, I would suggest.

My question for the Minister of Finance is related to Bill C-4 in particular: How critically important is it that we deliver tax breaks on July 1? We need to see Bill C-4 passed, as well as the other two pieces of legislation. Can he provide his thoughts with regard to the Prime Minister's commitment, how this legislation in good part delivers for Canadians, and the responsibility of the opposition, in particular the Conservative Party, to see the legislation go through?

[Lena Metlege Diab, Liberal, Minister of Immigration]

Mr. Chair, I know the member works very hard for her constituents, and I appreciate that. She spoke about the borders act, which is Bill C-2. What I will say, and this is what I have said, is that the integrity of the immigration system is critical to supporting border security and assuring Canadians that the system is well managed, including protections against fraud and misuse. The border bill would provide Canada with—

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Mr. Chair, there are two minutes to each of us then.

I begin with the Minister of Immigration. At 9:27 p.m., Minister, you said, “Legitimate asylum seekers, we want to protect you.” Minister, can you reconcile that with the expert opinion of Amnesty International and the Canadian Association of Refugee Lawyers, who say that Bill C-2 is an attack on the human right to seek asylum?

[Lena Metlege Diab, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Mr. Chair, we are getting there. We are reducing our immigration targets. We have Bill C-2 in front of us to deal with the large surge of asylums—

[Lena Metlege Diab, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Mr. Chair, we are working on reducing processing times. I have already met with representatives of the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, who assured me that they are working very hard and efficiently.

I think that Bill C-2 will help a lot.

[Lena Metlege Diab, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Mr. Chair, that is why the ineligibility requirements in Bill C-2 are there. It is to ensure that we deal with the people who do not have legitimate claims. My—

[Lena Metlege Diab, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Mr. Chair, the measures in Bill C-2 were introduced for the fact that we are seeing a high number of asylum claims, some of which are not legitimate, and that is meant to ensure—

[Lena Metlege Diab, Liberal, Minister of Immigration]

Mr. Chair, we have introduced Bill C-2 to ensure that we protect our integrity on the borders and—

[Lena Metlege Diab, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Mr. Chair, the safety of Canadians is of prime importance, which is why we have also introduced Bill C-2 to strengthen our borders, ensure the immigration system and visa—

[Lena Metlege Diab, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Mr. Chair, Bill C-2 is critical for ensuring the integrity of our immigration and asylum system. We want to make sure that people around the globe know we welcome talent and welcome people to come visit, but when their time expires, we want them to go back home. If someone is a legitimate asylum seeker, we are here to protect them, but our borders are not a shortcut for people claiming asylum.

These measures ensure that those who need protection most have access to it. I invite all members in the House to help us and support this bill.

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London Centre, ON]

Mr. Chair, I also want to ask about Bill C-2. The government recently introduced the bill. It focuses on a number of areas, but it is in many ways a bill that strengthens our immigration system.

Can the minister focus on particular aspects of Bill C-2 that she thinks really stand out for ensuring the integrity of the immigration system?

[Natilien Joseph, Liberal, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate the hon. Minister of Immigration on an excellent appointment.

Many immigrants and asylum seekers are very worried that they might be sent back to countries where things are unstable or dangerous. How will Bill C‑2 protect the basic rights and the security of vulnerable people in such cases?

Opposition Motion—Food Inflation and Budgetary Policy

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

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the member for Spadina—Harbourfront on her first remarks in this House of Commons. We share one thing in common: We are both former parliamentary interns. I welcome her to the House of Commons. I would encourage her to use her voice in this chamber. The Liberal Party has a tradition of allowing the member for Winnipeg North to disproportionately take up all the time. Therefore, I encourage her to stand so that we hear less from the member for Winnipeg North.

So far, the government has tabled Bill C-2, Bill C-3, Bill C-4 and Bill C-5. Today we heard from the government that it is going to spend billions upon billions of dollars more on defence. We are also facing the reality that the Liberal budget misallocated over $20 billion in its fiscal projections on what the government would be collecting on tariffs.

Amidst all the uncertainty and the major defence spending commitments, why has the government not committed to tabling a budget this spring, in this session, to give Canadians clarity?

Making Life More Affordable for Canadians Act

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Madam Speaker, I want to thank my colleague from King—Vaughan for her excellent speech and especially for her advocacy for seniors. I introduced a private members' bill in the 42nd Parliament to eliminate the mandatory RRIF withdrawals entirely. It would help seniors. I want to note that every single member of the Liberal Party voted against that and actually voted against affordability for seniors.

To get back to the bill, one of the failures of Bill C-2 is that every penny of these tax cuts is coming from borrowed money. The Conservative plan was costed; we were going to reduce reliance on Liberal-friendly consulting companies instead of packing on the debt.

I wonder if my colleague thinks that, perhaps, instead of adding more debt, the Liberals should cut back the billions they are giving to their friends at McKinsey and other management consulting companies.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, the member said to call for an election. Well, we had one just four or five weeks ago. I do not know whether Canadians want to see another election, but we will continue, moving forward, being a little more optimistic in that the last election made a very strong statement in itself. Canadians do have an expectation that Conservatives, New Democrats and Bloc members will work along with the government and support some critical initiatives.

There is a deadline with the piece of legislation. We need to get the legislation passed.

I would hope that my Conservative colleagues and friends across the way will give Canadians what they were asking for in the last election. The Prime Minister made the commitment to give them that tax break, along with 169 other Liberal members of Parliament. I believe that we can do that. There is no excuse for us not to do that.

This is a new Prime Minister and a new government. We can take a look at the legislation, where we highlight the benefits of Bill C-4. We can look at that legislative agenda. I want members to reflect on those three priority issues that I was able to comment on at the very beginning of the speech. We can think in terms of the one Canadian economy act, Bill C-5, which was just introduced today.

I reflect on what Canadians were telling us during the election. They are nervous. I would think everyone inside this chamber would recognize that Canadians would be better off if we were able to tackle those internal trade barriers. That could make a huge difference in terms of future taxation policy, as an example.

I am talking about billions of dollars. In fact, if we were to take down every possible barrier, it is estimated that it could be up to $200 billion. Imagine the economic and taxation benefits, in terms of potential future tax breaks. One never knows. We have to build that one economy.

Again, that is a commitment the Prime Minister made to Canadians. It is an election-mandated commitment. Today, we receive another piece of legislation to deal with that commitment, just like Bill C-4, where we made that commitment. Think about it.

Just earlier this week, the Prime Minister was in discussions, meeting in Saskatchewan with all the different first ministers. Four or five days later, here we are, on the floor of the House of Commons, being provided the opportunity to once again take on an issue of great substance and ultimately bring Canada together in a stronger and healthier way.

We look towards the opposition members of all political stripes. We had political parties of all stripes in Saskatchewan. We have Canadians of all stripes, everyone we can possibly imagine, virtually coming together and wanting to see a higher sense of co-operation on these election platform issues. That is one of the reasons the Prime Minister today is the Prime Minister today: understanding and being able to explain to Canadians the types of actions that are necessary to manage the economy and to bring us through, over the next two, three or four years, whenever the next election might be.

I could talk about Bill C-2. Again, when thinking in terms of potential budget expenditures, securing our borders, is a priority piece of legislation. It is a priority because Canadians mandated it from the last election in a very clear fashion. It is not as though the election was a year ago. We are talking about six weeks or five weeks ago. April 28 was election day, where they raised the issues of one Canada, tax breaks and concern related to our borders, dealing with things like fentanyl and automobile theft. Again, we have legislation that is there to deal with that.

Members opposite talk about safety in communities. We are talking about 1,000 new RCMP officers. We are talking about 1,000 new Canada border control agents.

We can bundle them together, take a look at Bill C-2, Bill C-4 and Bill C-5. All three of those bills come out of the election we just had.

Members opposite want to talk about if we believe it is out of our platform, then there should be no reason we do not support it. One would think. The point is that we are not here to serve a political party per se. We are here to serve our constituents and, collectively, all Canadians. This is something Canadians made very clear, crystal clear. They want the legislation to get through. We can do that.

It is amazing what one can do with unanimous consent when it comes to legislation. We have seen it in the past, and there is no reason we cannot see it this time around. Trust me, Madam Speaker, there will be a lot more legislation coming, and it will be thoroughly debated, no doubt. It will go through the committee process and so forth.

The three big items this week that have been introduced have been mandated by Canadians in a very real and tangible way. Opposition members have their choice. We live in a parliamentary system, and if they feel so inclined, they could prevent legislation from ultimately passing.

However, I can assure members opposite that I like to think I am a very opinionated person, and I will be sharing my thoughts and reflections on opposition parties and what they do over the next couple of weeks with the constituents I represent. I suspect the same will be duplicated throughout the country, because Canadians are watching. There is an expectation there.

It is not like we have a legislative agenda of 25 bills, not yet anyway. We have the priority legislation that is coming directly out of the election in the anticipation that, by putting it together, we would get a high sense of co-operation coming from all members of the House and ultimately be able to see it pass.

My ask of all members today is to take a look at it almost as a package deal where Canadians are very, very supportive. Nothing prevents members opposite from approaching the appropriate ministers if they have specific concerns. For example, yesterday, in talking about the border bill, Bill C-2, there was a lot of misinformation on the Conservatives' benches in regard to the mail system and how we are going to make Canadians safer by making changes in the legislation to enable law enforcement officers to get a warrant, in essence, to go through a letter, something they could never do before.

There is a lot to go through; I recognize that. However, I challenge members to raise concerns. Let us get legislation in a position where we could ultimately see it passed. This is what I am hoping to see and what I am going to continue to advocate for.

I did want to comment on housing, because housing is a very big issue and it is incorporated inside the legislation we are talking about today. I want to emphasize the program “build Canada homes”. I do believe the Prime Minister is very much focused on results. We will see tangible results, but we have to be prepared to see things ultimately passing through the House.

We will continue to work with different levels of government. Housing is a responsibility of the three different levels of government, not to mention the many different stakeholders that are out there. Ottawa will be there to support housing here in Canada.

Public Safety

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Minister of Public Safety]

Madam Speaker, I understand this matter involves Correctional Services Canada and is subject to the release by the parole board. Of course, Bill C-2 has a number of important measures in place to protect the border, including ensuring that in regard to those who are predators, especially on the Internet, using child pornography, for example, law enforcement has the right tools to be able to do its job more adequately.

[John Williamson, Conservative, Saint John—St. Croix, NB]

Madam Speaker, yesterday I asked the government why a convicted child sex offender in New Brunswick is out on bail while appealing his jail sentence. The government blamed the provinces, judges and the police, yet this child sex offender was already arrested and sentenced for his crime. The predator got out on bail under federal law, and the government is not closing this dangerous loophole. Now, the minister pointed to Bill C-2 as an answer, but this bill does nothing to stop this from happening again.

I ask again, when will Liberals stop convicted child sex offenders from receiving bail?

Main Estimates, 2025-26

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

Mr. Chair, Bill C-2 is a border bill. We are talking about sex offenders and jail. Will the minister keep them there?

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood—Rouge Park, ON]

Mr. Chair, we have brought forward Bill C-2. It addresses a number of issues around the border. That is a critical priority.

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood—Rouge Park, ON]

Mr. Chair, the first act of the government was to bring forward legislation, Bill C-2, which would impact many crimes. I am hoping the member—

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood—Rouge Park, ON]

Mr. Chair, Bill C-2 addresses the issue of guns that are coming into the country. It is a border bill, and I expect the member to support this bill.

[Michael Ma, Conservative, Markham—Unionville, ON]

Mr. Chair, Bill C-2 makes progress in dealing with convicted offenders in part 13. Why does the bill not treat convicted fentanyl traffickers with the same depth of approach?

[Michael Ma, Conservative, Markham—Unionville, ON]

Mr. Chair, Bill C-2 addresses money laundering and terrorist activity financing issues with monetary penalties. Where two milligrams of fentanyl can kill a person and the mass trafficking of fentanyl can be considered mass murder, could Bill C-2 be amended to recognize the trafficking of fentanyl as a terrorist or mass murder activity?

[Michael Ma, Conservative, Markham—Unionville, ON]

Mr. Chair, Canadian communities are not secure when addiction victims constitute a demand structure for the flow of fentanyl and its precursors. Why was the treatment for our addicted community members left out of the Liberal's Bill C-2?

[Michael Ma, Conservative, Markham—Unionville, ON]

Mr. Chair, Canadian communities are not secure when the producers and traffickers of fentanyl avoid jail time. Why was the repeal of the Liberal Bill C-5 on house arrest policies not in Bill C-2?

[Michael Ma, Conservative, Markham—Unionville, ON]

Mr. Chair, Canadian communities are not secure when repeat offenders can be released on bail within hours of arrest. Why was the repeal of the Liberal Bill C-75 catch-and-release policies not in Bill C-2?

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Minister of Public Safety]

Mr. Chair, Bill C-2 is a borders bill and does not include overall criminal justice reform.

I want to take this opportunity to welcome the member for Markham—Unionville to the House.

[Michael Ma, Conservative, Markham—Unionville, ON]

Mr. Chair, I will be splitting my time.

Bill C-2 only addresses fentanyl production with a focus on a precursor in part 2. Our borders are weaker when there are no consequences for drug dealers. What minimum sentencing will Bill C-2 impose on fentanyl dealers?

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood—Rouge Park, ON]

Mr. Chair, there are resources available, including through Bill C-2, which we introduced this week. I know that many police services are doing a great job in their local jurisdiction. They are working with the support of the RCMP in their respective regions.

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood—Rouge Park, ON]

Mr. Chair, in the three weeks since I was appointed, I have been working on a bill, Bill C-2, that would ensure that we continue to fight fentanyl at our borders.

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood—Rouge Park, ON]

Mr. Chair, my number one priority since being appointed to this role has been to bring forward Bill C-2.

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant South—Six Nations, ON]

Mr. Chair, the minister promised to tighten bail rules just last week, but why did he not do that in Bill C-2?

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Chair, I know that a good number of members, especially from the Brampton Liberal caucus, raised the issue of auto theft. The member will recall that we actually had a summit dealing with auto theft, bringing the different stakeholders together. I think people would be encouraged to hear that within Bill C-2, there is a really good attempt to take yet another step in dealing with that particular issue.

Could the minister provide some thoughts on the auto theft component?

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood—Rouge Park, ON]

Madam Chair, as we were ready to table the bill, I was hoping it would be Bill C-1, but I was told that that had to be for the Speech from the Throne.

With great respect, Bill C-2 is the first formal bill this 45th Parliament is debating, and we are debating it for a very good reason. It is to ensure that the safety and security of our borders are strengthened, that Canadians feel safe at home and that guns, fentanyl and illicit drugs and money do not come over our border.

It is a very important step, but it is only a step. There is a lot more to do, including bail reform, which I look forward to coming back to the House for under the leadership of our Minister of Justice. As my friend heard and many in this House and I have heard, securing the border is a top priority for the Prime Minister and for this government.

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

Madam Chair, I appreciate the comments from the minister. I want to pick up on how important it is that we advance Bill C-2.

Border control-related issues were raised extensively during the election, and when I reflect on the election, I believe this bill is something Canadians want to see. I would highlight that the Canadian Police Association, and the minister can correct me if I am wrong, is supporting Bill C-2. Bill C-2 would, in fact, give much more strength to protecting Canada's borders.

I am wondering if the minister could reflect on it being the second bill, which clearly demonstrates its priority. Can he provide his thoughts on that?

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Minister of Public Safety]

Madam Chair, I wish you and the hon. committee members a good evening. I want to thank everyone for this invitation.

It is my privilege to appear before everyone as Canada's new Minister of Public Safety. Let me thank the officials who are here today. Let me also express my deepest condolences to the late Marc Garneau. His was one of the first names I learned when I came to Canada. He is a national hero. He impacted so many people and so many generations of Canadians. He served this House and Canadians with such grace and such incredible strength and integrity. I want to thank his family for sharing him with Canada.

I am humbled and honoured by the Prime Minister's appointment. I recognize it is a role that comes with great responsibility. I am to undertake my duties to serve Canadians with the utmost dedication and commitment. Protecting the public is one of the government's foremost duties, and it is an obligation shared by all parliamentarians. As I serve in this role, I also commit to working with all members of this committee, and indeed all parliamentarians, as we aim to fulfill this fundamental obligation.

These main estimates will ensure we can deliver on our collective duty to Canadians. To fulfill our obligation, we must first ensure that we can continue to support all of Public Safety's dedicated personnel, those who work hard each and every day to keep Canadians safe from harm.

As a reflection of its importance to our country's security, the Public Safety portfolio is the largest non-military portfolio in the government. Altogether, the Public Safety portfolio includes over 60,000 personnel. Every day, each of these individuals is dedicated to keeping Canadians safe and secure while they safeguard our rights and freedoms.

One of the first things I did after being appointed Canada's Minister of Public Safety was meet with some of those 60,000 personnel. I went to Cornwall to meet with the CBSA and RCMP officers securing the border and protecting our country. I look forward to meeting with many public safety personnel over the coming months to thank them for their dedication to their communities and their country, and for all they do to keep Canadians safe. However, it is not enough just to thank them for their work. We must give them the tools and resources they need to do their jobs effectively.

On a portfolio-wide basis, the total authorities sought in the main estimates for the fiscal year will result in funding approvals of $16.2 billion for the Public Safety portfolio. That will result in a net increase of $3.1 billion, or 23.7%, over the previous year's estimates. For Public Safety Canada, the total funding sought is $2.16 billion, which is an increase of $557.7 million, or 34.7%, over the previous year. For the Canada Border Services Agency, the total funding sought is $2.99 billion, an increase of $343.4 million, or 13%, over the previous year. For the Correctional Service of Canada, the total funding sought is $3.86 billion, an increase of $691.3 million, or 21.8%, over the previous year. For the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, the total funding sought is $980.1 million, an increase of $277.5 million, or 39.5%, over the previous year. Finally, for the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, the total funding sought is $6.08 billion, an increase of $1.23 billion, or 25.3%.

As part of these estimates, $128.7 million has been designated to the CBSA and the RCMP to further enhance the integrity of Canada's border. As hon. members are aware, earlier this week we introduced Bill C-2, the strong borders act. I want to thank members who have already lent their voices to debating this bill. The strong borders act would ensure that in addition to the increased financial support we are providing to the agencies tasked with keeping us safe, we will be, to quote the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, “modernizing legislation and equipping law enforcement with necessary tools to combat transnational organized crime in an increasingly complex threat environment.”

We need to make it harder for organized crime to move money, drugs, people and firearms that endanger our communities. We need to ensure Canada's law enforcement is equipped with the tools needed to stay ahead of organized crime and is empowered to crack down on illicit activities. This is essential to maintaining the safety and security of our country.

Bill C-2, the strong borders act, would help us achieve just that. The bill would keep Canadians safe by ensuring law enforcement has the right tools to keep our borders secure, to combat transnational organized crime, to stop the flow of illegal fentanyl and to crack down on money laundering. We will also train 1,000 new CBSA officers and 1,000 more RCMP personnel.

Finally, further action will be taken over the coming months to keep our communities even safer, to get guns off our streets and to make bail harder to get for repeat offenders charged with car thefts, home invasions, human trafficking and drug smuggling.

As the Minister of Public Safety, my top priority will always be to ensure that each and every Canadian is safe and secure in our country. As I have already mentioned, it is a responsibility that I do not take lightly. Public safety is an issue that I have been seized with for a number of years in my riding and community, and as the Minister of Public Safety, I take great pride in this position of leadership, which has a direct impact on the safety of all Canadians and their communities.

Once again, I am thankful for this invitation today. I look forward to questions.

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood—Rouge Park, ON]

Madam Chair, of course, Bill C-2 is one aspect of the way we are going to fix this. If members look at the provisions relating to the sharing of information within the IRCC and among different agencies of the federal government and provincial government, it is one way to track the number of people who are here or who have left. Of course, the role of the CBSA is also to enforce removals that are put in front of it, and we look forward to ensuring that expedited removals take place.

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry—Soulanges—Huntingdon, QC]

Madam Chair, we have often seen that the government does not really know who is leaving Canada. For example, following a study by CIBC economists in 2023, the government discovered that Canada was undercounting its population by one million. Unlike some other countries, Canada has no exit immigration controls, such as biometric data checks on foreign nationals. As a result, the government is losing track of the temporary immigrants on its territory.

Bill C‑2 contains a provision about reporting the departure of sex offenders from Canada. However, without tighter controls, this measure could be ineffective, since the government often has no idea who is leaving the country. It must rely solely on airlines and information shared by foreign countries.

How does the minister plan to fix this situation?

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood—Rouge Park, ON]

Madam Chair, the best way to support Canadians is deterrence. One of the things Bill C-2 incorporates is deterrence of those who may be crossing through irregular ports of entry. We believe that other measures contained in the bill would support deterrence of those who are crossing the border irregularly.

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry—Soulanges—Huntingdon, QC]

Madam Chair, I will ask the minister to be more specific.

Given that some officers are retiring, does the minister believe that training 600 officers per year will be enough to meet current and future requirements following the passage of Bill C‑2?

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Chair, I was encouraged, and I am sure the minister was too, this morning. We had a high sense of working together when every member of the House of Commons voted in favour of the ways and means motion. The minister talked about unifying Canadians and the chamber. One of the things that we could also do is get behind Bill C-2 and the initiative of building a stronger Canada.

[Shelby Kramp-Neuman, Conservative, Hastings—Lennox and Addington—Tyendinaga, ON]

Madam Chair, were any police or chiefs organizations consulted during the drafting process of Bill C-2?

[Shelby Kramp-Neuman, Conservative, Hastings—Lennox and Addington—Tyendinaga, ON]

Madam Chair, were any indigenous groups consulted in the drafting of Bill C-2?

[Shelby Kramp-Neuman, Conservative, Hastings—Lennox and Addington—Tyendinaga, ON]

Madam Chair, has Bill C-2 been costed?

[Shelby Kramp-Neuman, Conservative, Hastings—Lennox and Addington—Tyendinaga, ON]

Madam Chair, were any women's rights organizations consulted during the drafting of Bill C-2?

[Shelby Kramp-Neuman, Conservative, Hastings—Lennox and Addington—Tyendinaga, ON]

Madam Chair, these are human lives. Does Bill C-2 repeal previous Liberal legislation that grants predators the possibility of bail, yes or no?

[Shelby Kramp-Neuman, Conservative, Hastings—Lennox and Addington—Tyendinaga, ON]

Madam Chair, does Bill C-2 include the Prime Minister's promised bail reform?

[Shelby Kramp-Neuman, Conservative, Hastings—Lennox and Addington—Tyendinaga, ON]

Madam Chair, were any victim rights organizations consulted during the drafting process of Bill C-2?

[Shelby Kramp-Neuman, Conservative, Hastings—Lennox and Addington—Tyendinaga, ON]

Madam Chair, does Bill C-2 itself include any additional funding for police services, maritime patrol, IRCC, CBSA or Public Safety, yes or no?

[Shelby Kramp-Neuman, Conservative, Hastings—Lennox and Addington—Tyendinaga, ON]

Madam Chair, Bill C-2 does not grant human traffickers running across the border the possibility of bail. Is this true or false?

Business of the House

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, it must be said that rarely is the sequel better than the original, but the member will have an opportunity to prove the opposite.

We are particularly grateful to the opposition and, through my hon. colleague, his caucus. I thank them for adopting a great throne speech that sketches out a very clear and bold agenda for fixing the Canadian economy and taking on the tariffs. It must be said that steel and aluminum producers are far more concerned about tariffs, and the Prime Minister is singularly committed to addressing the tariff challenge the United States has put to us.

We will have tributes today to a former colleague, friend and member of this House.

After the round of tributes, we will resume debate at second reading of Bill C-2, which contains measures relating to border security between Canada and the United States.

Pursuant to the order made by the House last week, we will debate the estimates in committee of the whole later this evening, as well as next Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday, as I said in my previous Thursday statement.

Tomorrow morning, we will begin debate on the bill introduced earlier today regarding affordability measures for Canadians. Lastly, next Monday and Tuesday will be allotted days.

Public Safety

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

Mr. Speaker, I want to take an opportunity to say that today we are debating Bill C-2, one of the first measures this government has taken to make our streets safer. We are committed to doing the work that is necessary, and there is also good news. The chief of police of Toronto has stated that auto thefts have decreased by nearly 39%, home invasions are down 42%, homicides are down 67% and shootings are down 46%.

We will be there to protect Canadians.

Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship

[Lena Metlege Diab, Liberal, Minister of Immigration]

Mr. Speaker, those figures are inaccurate. That is misinformation. The new government is hard at work to improve our immigration system, and the introduction of Bill C-2 on Tuesday was an example of that. We are taking significant steps to preserve the integrity of our system while also upholding our humanitarian commitments, because we understand that a well-managed immigration system is essential to a safer, stronger Canada.

Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply

[Julie Dzerowicz, Liberal, Davenport, ON]

Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Saanich—Gulf Islands.

It is my enormous pleasure to rise in this House to respond to the Speech from the Throne. However, before I begin, I want to thank the residents of my constituency of Davenport for their faith and trust in me. I am enormously grateful that they have re-elected me for a fourth term to serve them as well as serve our great country.

I give a special thanks to my incredible team and my created family. There is no way I could do this job without their love and support.

Davenport residents came out in full force to vote in this election, because they are worried. They are worried about the threats by the President of the United States to our sovereignty, to our economy and to our future prosperity. They also know that the world is a more dangerous and a more uncertain place than at any other point since World War II. They feel that Canada is facing challenges that are unprecedented in our lifetimes, and so they voted for a leader and a party with a plan to make Canada more economically resilient.

We have a plan to unite our country, and to defend and secure our country. We have a plan to turn the challenges that we face today into incredible opportunities so that Canadians can face the future with confidence, strength and the resources we need to succeed and prosper in the 21st century.

Canada is the greatest country in the world. We are a strong and brave country, and our potential is unlimited. We are also a country that is in crisis, and we must act urgently and immediately to ensure that Canada remains strong and free.

Key segments of our plan are outlined in the Speech from the Throne, and I will highlight some that I believe are particularly meaningful to the residents of my constituency of Davenport.

At a time of global uncertainty and economic threats, Davenport residents are very happy that part of our plan is to ensure a more resilient Canada, one that is anchored in our own internal economic strength. We have virtually everything in this country. We now need to eliminate the roadblocks and ensure the resources to build us up.

How do we do this? Our Prime Minister is clear: We will have one Canadian economy, not 13, which is what we have now. We will eliminate interprovincial trade barriers. Our federal government has promised to pass legislation to remove all remaining federal barriers to internal trade and labour mobility by July 1. The impact will be the freer movement of people, goods and services across our country. This will also allow our small and medium-sized businesses as well as our innovators to expand and grow across our country, which is something Davenport businesses will be very happy and very excited about. Best of all, lifting these barriers has the potential to add $200 billion to our economy each and every single year.

Second, we will unite the country by investing in nation-building projects, primarily infrastructure, transportation and supply chain corridors. This would mean more supply chain options in Canada, which would mean more railroads, ports, highways, etc. The focus will be on projects of national significance and projects that will connect Canada, which will deepen Canada's ties with the world and will create high-paying jobs for generations of Canadians. Of course, all of these projects of national significance will have to ensure meaningful consultation with indigenous peoples, and all projects must adhere to our climate commitments. Best of all, Davenport residents are so excited by the ambition of our government. We truly believe that if we implement these measures and more, we can become not only a resilient economy, but also the strongest economy in the G7.

As our Speech from the Throne says, the economy is only truly strong when it serves everyone. Many Davenport residents, like so many Canadians, are having such a hard time making ends meet, and so we are responding by introducing a middle-class tax cut, which will save two-income families up to $840 a year. Our government has also committed to continue to fund programs that we introduced over the last almost 10 years. This includes national child care, national dental care, pharmacare, the Canada child benefit and the Canada disability benefit. All these programs and more are life-changing programs that the residents in my constituency of Davenport love. I know they will be delighted that we will continue to support them.

Our Speech from the Throne also contains a clear commitment for our government to build more housing. We are located in downtown west Toronto, and Davenport residents are worried that they are not going to be able to continue to live in the city that they love, that their kids and their grandkids will not be able to live in the city where they were raised. Our government has committed to a number of measures that will greatly benefit Davenport residents. We are going to provide more support for Canadians who are trying to buy homes. We will cut the GST on homes under $1 million for first-time homebuyers, which will deliver savings of up to $50,000. We are going to lower the GST on homes between $1 million and $1.5 million.

Davenport is a multi-ethnic working-class/middle-class riding, and most of our homes are in these price ranges, so both of these measures are very welcome and will be very helpful. In addition, we are spending a lot more to build houses.

Our federal government has committed to double down, with an ambitious new housing plan that will double the rate of homebuilding in Canada. We have learned a lot over the last few years about what worked and what we can do better. Based on this data, we have announced the most ambitious housing plan since World War II. These measures will include the creation of “build Canada homes” to accelerate the development of new affordable housing. We will invest in innovation. We are going to invest in the growth of modular and prefabricated housing. We will increase the financing for affordable home developers. We will eliminate red tape and development costs by cutting municipal development charges in half for multi-unit housing.

All of this will rapidly increase housing supply and bring housing costs down. Members will be happy to learn that our additional funding and ambitious housing plan will use Canadian technology, Canadian skilled workers and Canadian lumber. All these measures, in addition to the ones we have already had in place over the last seven to eight years, will go a long way in ensuring greater housing supply and affordable home prices for the residents of my riding of Davenport and, indeed, for all Canadians.

Community safety is vitally important to Davenport residents. For us, there are way too many American handguns on the city streets of Toronto. While the numbers have gone down, we still have far too many car thefts in Canada's largest city. I know that Davenport residents will be happy to know that our government, just yesterday, introduced Bill C-2, which would enhance security at the border.

When passed, CBSA officers who work at our borders will have new powers to stop stolen products, like cars, from leaving our country. They will also ensure the deployment of more scanners, drones and helicopters, additional personnel and canine teams, which will help stop guns and drugs from coming into our country.

Finally, our government has committed to toughen the Criminal Code, to make bail harder for repeat offenders charged with violent crime and/or major offences.

We have made serious commitments to spend more money to protect Canada's sovereignty. We have to do more to secure borders, to secure the Arctic and to secure Canada from coast to coast to coast. We have made a commitment to fulfill our NATO commitment of 2% of our GDP and we will achieve this with haste. I also believe that we will commit to even greater NATO spending, but we have to wait for NATO meetings in June for the total number and commitments.

In conclusion, Canada is in crisis. It is time for Canadians to continue to stay united. It is time to build a resilient Canadian economy, to invest in national building projects and to spend less but invest more. It is time for us to secure our borders and protect our sovereignty, to build more affordable housing and put more money in the pockets of Canadians. These measures and more, as well as working together, will continue to ensure a prosperous Canada, the strongest economy in the G7 and an economy that truly serves everyone.

Canada is the greatest country in the world. We are a confident country with an ambitious plan. We are indeed a country that is strong and free.

[Ginette Lavack, Liberal, St. Boniface—St. Vital, MB]

Madam Speaker, there is a bill that was tabled, Bill C-2, the strong borders act, which does address and start to discuss issues around security, gun controls, drug trafficking and all of those issues that certainly are having impacts on the security and the safety of our communities.

I would hope my neighbour across the aisle will consider that bill once it comes to the floor for debate and will vote in favour.

Public Safety

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Minister of Public Safety]

Mr. Speaker, I am deeply saddened by the news coming out of the city of Toronto this morning. The gun violence is unacceptable and perpetrators must be brought to justice.

We are partnering with police services across the country to fight organized crime and disrupt firearm smuggling and trafficking operations. The strong borders act, introduced in the House yesterday, includes provisions to crack down on illegal firearms and organized crime.

I look forward to working with the member opposite to pass this important legislation. We will continue to work tirelessly to support police across Canada.

Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it is great to be back in this honourable House to serve the people of Whitby. I have been elected for the third time, and it is a great honour to be back in this chamber representing my community once again.

We have begun the 45th Parliament at a time of real challenge and great promise for our nation. Around the world, alliances are shifting, economies are evolving, and uncertainty is rising. Here at home, our economic security and sovereignty have been tested recently, but I believe Canadians remain hopeful and focused. They sent us here, I believe strongly, to find solutions and build a stronger country together.

In Whitby, families are working hard, caring for one another and trying to make ends meet. They are the reason we are all here. That is why the Speech from the Throne that was delivered by His Majesty King Charles III matters. It calls on us to meet this moment the Canadian way, by coming together to build, protect, secure and unite. This is our government's commitment to Canadians: to protect our progress, build on what we have, secure our future and move forward together.

Today, I want to speak on the priorities that must guide our work: number one, building the strongest economy in the G7; and number two, making life more affordable, keeping our communities safe, as well as uniting Canadians in a common purpose.

We begin where it all starts, with the economy. When I think about the economy, I do not think of charts and stock indexes. It is not just about numbers. Economies are, first and foremost, about people. I think of the entrepreneur in Whitby starting a small business and hiring local grads from Ontario Tech University. I think of the skilled trade student at Durham College earning his ticket, saving for a home and ready to build a life. I think of the auto worker at the General Motors plant with two kids who lives with uncertainty because of the tariffs placed on us by the U.S., the newcomer with global experience who cannot seem to find the right job or families who are wondering if and when their hard work will truly pay off. That is the real economy: people striving to reach their potential. It is up to us to shape it.

That is why the government is focused on building an economy that delivers for everyone. We are breaking down old barriers to trade between provinces. Removing these barriers could add $200 billion to our economy. That is how we grow: by working as one, one economy for all Canadians.

We are also looking outward. Canada has free trade agreements with 51 countries, covering over 60% of global GDP. By diversifying our trade, we reduce our reliance on any one partner, and we can deepen ties with trusted allies who share our values. We are fast-tracking major nation-building projects in energy, transit, trade, housing and digital infrastructure. As the Prime Minister has said, it is time to build; we have done it before, and we can do it again. That includes cutting red tape, streamlining approvals and driving nation-building projects forward, projects that create jobs, lower emissions, connect our regions and expand the flow of goods to markets.

We are also doubling the indigenous loan guarantee program to $10 billion, empowering more indigenous communities to be equity partners in major projects. Economic reconciliation is not a slogan; it is a path to shared prosperity.

We are also scaling up businesses and boosting productivity, starting with critical minerals and AI adoption. We are modernizing the SR&ED program, launching a patent box to help protect Canadian ideas, introducing flow-through shares for start-ups and recapitalizing the venture capital catalyst initiative with $1 billion. These are all tools to attract investment, leverage our strengths, scale innovation and lead the G7 in economic growth. When Canadians have the tools to succeed, when we invest in their potential, our economy grows for everyone.

Affordability is a key topic in my riding. In Whitby and across Canada, I hear the same message time and again. Life is getting too expensive: groceries, rent and energy. People are doing their best, but they just cannot get ahead. Now, affordability is not just about statistics; it is about dignity. It is about making sure hard work actually pays off. We are protecting the progress we made with universal child care, dental care, pharmacare and the national school food program. These are not luxuries but lifelines for some of the most vulnerable in our community, and we are going further.

We have introduced a middle-class tax cut. The average dual-income family will keep $840 more of their hard-earned dollars this year and every year after. That is a real difference. It means sports for the kids, school supplies or a few more bags of groceries at the grocery store. We are also keeping $10-a-day child care going strong. It is not just good for kids; it is great for the economy. It allows parents, especially women, to get back to work, and it saves families thousands of dollars each year.

We have expanded dental care, so no Canadian has to choose between healthy teeth and putting food on the table, and we are making bold moves on housing. For too many Canadians, we know the dream of home ownership feels out of reach. Young people, newcomers and seniors, everyone deserves a place to call home. We are removing GST from new home purchases and saving first-time homebuyers up to $50,000. This builds on existing measures for helping first-time homebuyers, like 30-year mortgages, a 25% reduction on mortgage insurance and tax-free savings accounts to save up for their first home.

We are also cutting development charges in half, with federal support to offset the cost of housing infrastructure. We are launching “build Canada homes”, a public developer that will build deeply affordable housing; investing $25 billion in innovative prefab builders and $10 billion in low-cost loans for affordable housing developers; and using public lands, standardizing design and scaling up Canadian-made modular and mass timber construction. We will build faster and better; buy Canadian steel, lumber and more; and create good jobs right here at home.

In Whitby, we have seen results, with $25 million from the housing accelerator fund, a motel transformed through the rapid housing initiative, the expansion of a local housing co-operative and over 11,000 units on our waterfront that will be unlocked through the housing infrastructure fund. These are real, tangible results in my community, and I am very proud of the Liberal record. I am certain that is why Canadians returned us to this side of the House to continue leading the country forward. Now we are committing to building 500,000 homes per year across Canada, because housing is a foundation for a good life for Canadians.

Now let us talk about security for a moment. Our country can only thrive when people feel safe, and right now, Canadians are deeply concerned. Auto theft, gun violence, drug and human trafficking and organized crime are real threats that keep my community members up at night. I want my constituents to know we are responding. The example today is the tabling of Bill C-2, the Strong Borders Act, and we are going to do much more.

We are investing boldly to protect Canadians and defend our sovereignty, starting with our armed forces. We are giving a raise to Canadian Armed Forces members, building more housing on bases, improving access to health care and child care for military families and much, much more.

As climate change continues to impact our north, we are protecting our Arctic sovereignty, which has become more and more urgent. We will forge a new Canada-Europe Arctic security agreement to meet the moment. We are also stepping up at our southern border. We are training 1,000 new RCMP officers and 1,000 new CBSA officers, and deploying new scanners, drones, canine units and much more.

We are also cracking down on repeat and violent offenders, making bail harder for car thieves, human traffickers and home invaders. Sentences will be tougher for organized crime and sexual violence, including online abuse and deep fakes. As hate crime rises in our communities, we are acting decisively. We will make it a criminal offence to intentionally obstruct access to or intimidate those attending schools, places of worship or community centres. This is great progress. When we protect what matters, our families, our communities and our country, we give every Canadian the confidence to build a better future, together.

Lastly, let me wrap up by saying the throne speech lays the foundation for progress. It gives us the tools to build a strong economy, make life more affordable, keep our communities safe and strengthen our democracy and country. More than that, it gives us a vision we can rally around.

I believe in Whitby, in Canada and in the strength and determination of our people. Let us get to work with compassion, courage and conviction. Let us build a country our children can be proud of, a Canada that is stronger, more affordable, more secure and more united than ever before.