Bill C-242

Jail Not Bail Act

An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Department of Justice Act

This enactment amends the Criminal Code in order to
(a) replace the principle of restraint in section 493.1 of the Act with the principle of protection of the public;
(b) add the protection of the public as a consideration in decisions on the release of an accused;
(c) add several violent indictable offences to the list of reverse-onus offences in subsection 515(6) of the Act for the determination of judicial interim release;
(d) create a list of major offences, composed of violent reverse-onus offences;
(e) prevent those charged with a major offence from being released after arrest by a peace officer;
(f) require that only a superior court judge may determine, on a reverse-onus basis, whether to permit the interim release of an accused if the accused was charged with a major offence while they were on release in respect of another major offence and if they were convicted of a major offence in the last ten years;
(g) provide for the expiry of the interim release of an accused upon their conviction of an indictable offence while they await sentencing;
(h) prohibit those who have been convicted of an indictable offence in the last ten years from being named as a surety;
(i) require that a justice assessing judicial interim release consider whether or not an accused is a Canadian citizen or a permanent resident and, if not, whether they may attempt to leave the country;
(j) make it a condition that those who are not Canadian citizens or permanent residents deposit their passports in order to be released whether by a peace officer after arrest or by a justice on judicial interim release; and
(k) change the standard of assessment under paragraph 515(10)(b) of the Act of whether an accused, if released, will commit an offence or interfere with the administration of justice from a “substantial likelihood” to “whether it is reasonably foreseeable” and require that the criminal history of an accused be taken into consideration.
It also amends the Department of Justice Act to require the Minister of Justice to prepare and table in Parliament an annual report on the state of judicial interim release in Canada.

Lawful Access Act, 2026

[Rhonda Kirkland, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Richmond Centre—Marpole.

It is an honour to rise on behalf of my neighbours in Oshawa to speak to Bill C-22.

Over the past couple of weeks, like all of us in the House, I was fortunate to spend time at home, where I had the opportunity to meet with many proud and resilient Oshawa residents, community leaders and local organizations. Those conversations are always meaningful. They are sobering, though, because again and again, I keep hearing one concern raised, and that is safety.

Canadians are worried about safety in their communities and about the never-ending crimes taking place in Oshawa. They are worried about violent repeat offenders who are continually being caught and released again. They are worried that the system is not working the way it should. This is the context in which we are debating the bill before us today. It is not just about lawful access or technical authorities. It is about trust in our justice system. For many Canadians, that trust has been shaken over the past 11 years of the Liberal government.

In recent weeks, the self-proclaimed, so-called “new” Liberal government, which has been in power for over a decade, has asked Canadians to trust it on public safety. At the same time, Liberals voted against four solution-oriented Conservative public safety bills that were all focused on one thing, protecting Canadians.

For example, Bill C-220 would have ended the practice of courts considering a non-citizen's immigration status when issuing a sentence. We saw that happen again recently, this time in New Brunswick, where a judge reduced a man's sentence so he would not be deported from Canada, just 10 days after that man was charged with assaulting his former partner.

Bill C-242 would have ensured tougher bail rules, fewer release loopholes for violent repeat offenders and real protection for victims and communities.

Bill C-243, if passed, would have ended annual parole hearings for murderers, a practice that retraumatizes and revictimizes survivors over and over again.

Lastly, Bill C-246 would have ensured an end to sentence stacking for sexual predators, so that every crime would carry its own penalty.

These proposals were supported by police associations, victim organizations, victim services and advocacy groups across Canada, yet every single one of them was voted down by the Liberal government.

As the member of Parliament for Oshawa, I cannot fathom how every single Liberal MP representing a constituency in the Durham region, for instance, could vote against these bills. This is specifically difficult to understand given the clear calls from our own community. The Durham Regional Police Service, the Durham Regional Police Association and local victim organizations have all spoken out on the need for more solutions to strengthen our justice system. Andrew Tummonds, the president of the Durham Regional Police Association, said it clearly after Bill C-242 was defeated:

Yesterday Bill C-242 was voted down in the House of Commons. This Bill was supported by Police Associations and Victim Organizations and presented common sense solutions to ongoing problems within our Criminal Justice System. This non partisan Bill focused on the need for tougher bail conditions and allowed for the closing of loopholes that resulted in dangerous offenders being released.

Each and every day in the Region of Durham the Members of the DRPA work to keep violent repeat offenders off our streets. We are disheartened that much needed change was voted down and believe that community safety and the protection of victims should supersede partisan politics.

Those are not partisan words. They are the voices of those who serve and protect on the front lines. All of this is happening while our community faces very real and immediate concerns, including just a few weeks ago, when a convicted first-degree murderer and child rapist was granted an unescorted, 72-hour release in Oshawa.

When the Liberal government now brings forward Bill C-22 and asks Canadians to trust it with new powers over their digital lives, I am sure it will excuse us from wondering if this is a good idea. We have the right to question. In fact, it is our job to question. We have the responsibility to take a step back, take a look, ask the hard questions and ensure that we get this right for every Canadian who expects that their private life will remain private.

Part 1 of this bill focuses on giving law enforcement faster and more effective access to information, and we all understand that matters. Crime has changed; we get that. Criminals operate online, often anonymously. They use encrypted platforms and operate across borders in ways that make investigations so much more complex. Law enforcement has told us this has created some real challenges. In some cases, investigations into serious crimes can stall because authorities cannot quickly identify who is behind an account.

This bill attempts to respond to those challenges by allowing police to ask telecommunication providers to confirm whether they provide service to a specific account or identifier, which would create judicial mechanisms to obtain basic subscriber information such as a name, an address or an email; and clarifying how officers could search and examine computer data during an investigation.

Bill C-22 would also allow, for urgent situations, for certain information to be obtained without a warrant when time is critical and would enable Canadian authorities to work with international partners when data is held outside the country. These are meaningful tools, absolutely, and in the right circumstances they could help prevent harm and bring criminals to justice. However, we have to proceed with care, because when we expand powers, we must also make sure we are strengthening safeguards. When we act in urgency, we still must protect rights, and when we grant authority, we must also ensure accountability in that authority.

Part 2 of the bill raises another important set of issues. It would create a framework requiring electronic service providers to ensure they can support lawful access when authorized. In some cases, companies could be required to build and maintain systems that allow authorities to access information under legal authority. It would also allow the Minister of Public Safety to issue confidential orders requiring specific technical capabilities, subject to review by the intelligence commissioner.

It raises serious questions, though, about privacy, transparency and about how far government should go in shaping digital systems. It is up to us as the official opposition to ask those questions. In fact, it is a role that we take very seriously, and it is an important role that makes this Parliament work.

We have been told that Canada is behind other countries in adopting a lawful access regime. However, Canadians not only are asking us to move quickly but want us to move carefully and with great accountability and care in taking a look at what exactly is going on. They are asking us to get this right and ensure that any system we create reflects our values.

This bill would include a parliamentary review after three years. That is a positive step, but our responsibility to Canadians is to get this right from the start. Conservatives are the party of law and order. We believe in supporting law enforcement and protecting victims, but we also believe that freedom matters. That is why we are carefully reviewing the legislation. We are listening. We are asking serious questions. We are doing the work necessary to ensure that this bill strikes the right balance, because Canadians should not have to choose between safety and freedom. They deserve both.

Corrections and Conditional Release Act

[Tony Baldinelli, Conservative, Niagara Falls—Niagara-on-the-Lake, ON]

moved that Bill C-232, An Act to amend the Corrections and Conditional Release Act (maximum security offenders), be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise in this chamber to debate this important legislation that would help restore Canadians' trust and confidence in our criminal justice system and in federal institutions like Correctional Service Canada.

Bill C-232, an act to amend the Corrections and Conditional Release Act, is being debated today because I was inspired to bring this legislation forward after being approached by the loved ones of victims who were shocked and appalled to receive a phone call from CSC on May 29, 2023, about the transfer of serial killer and rapist Paul Bernardo from a maximum-security prison at Millhaven Institution in Ontario to a medium-security prison at La Macaza in Quebec.

This terrible decision by CSC Commissioner Anne Kelly not only shocked the country but appalled and revictimized the victims' families, friends and the communities I represent in Niagara Falls and Niagara-on-the-Lake. Bill C-232 is about doing what is right. It is about addressing and resolving a serious flaw in our criminal justice and corrections system that permits criminal monsters like Paul Bernardo, Dellen Millard, Mark Smich and Luka Magnotta, among others, to benefit and be allowed to transfer from a maximum-security institution to medium security.

This bill proposes to require that all court-ordered dangerous offenders and mass murderers be permanently assigned a maximum-security classification and confined in a maximum-security penitentiary or area in a penitentiary. It would also repeal the Liberals' least restrictive environment standard for assigning inmates to prison. This standard was adopted in 2018 under the Justin Trudeau government in Bill C-83.

In addition to repealing this weak policy, it would strengthen and restore the language of “only the necessary restrictions” that the previous Conservative government put in place when it passed the Safe Streets and Communities Act in 2012. In fact, that legislation, known as Bill C-10, was spearheaded by my predecessor, the Hon. Rob Nicholson, who proudly represented Niagara Falls for 24 years prior to his deserved retirement in 2019. Mr. Nicholson was the minister of justice and attorney general of Canada at the time.

Paul Bernardo is serving a life sentence as a dangerous offender for the horrific abduction, sexual assaults and murders of Kristen French and Leslie Mahaffy. Bernardo was convicted in 1995 and sentenced to life in prison with no possibility of parole for 25 years for stealing and ending the lives of two teenage girls who had their whole bright futures ahead of them. When he committed these atrocities, he also ruined the lives of their loved ones and sentenced them to a lifetime of inescapable pain, trauma and suffering.

So far, Bernardo has applied for parole three times, in 2018, 2021 and 2024. He has rightfully been denied each time. In his most recent parole hearing in November of 2024, Bernardo sought day parole at a halfway house or, at a minimum, escorted absences from prison so that he could attend a community program for sex offenders. He was denied both.

According to a CBC article, Tanya Nouwens, one of the members of a two-member parole panel, told Bernardo, “Although you have made progress, we are still placing a lot of weight on the clinical assessments, a lot of weight on the seriousness of your criminal behaviour. And for that reason, the board has determined today your risk would be undue”. While it was the right outcome, this quote is still concerning because it raises the question of progress.

I have to ask: Progress toward what end? Paul Bernardo is the worst of the worst. Let me be frank. He should never be granted parole, but after 10 years under the Liberal government's watch, Canada's justice and corrections system has been eroded and lost its balance. It has become far more one-sided and empathetic toward the offender and the consideration of the offender's care than the impacts on victims and victims' families and how law-abiding Canadians see, perceive and make sense of that system.

In fact, in a CBC article from June 2023, Benjamin Roebuck, the federal ombudsperson for victims of crime, said the corrections system strikes the wrong balance between victims' rights and prisoners' privacy rights. In a quote from that article, he says, “The entire system is imbalanced...the victims are the ones who are most directly affected, who continue to suffer from the consequences”.

Mr. Roebuck further reinforced this view when he testified at the public safety committee in November 2023, in a study on the rights of victims of crime, reclassification and transfer of federal offenders. Mr. Roebuck informed committee members that:

We need supporting legislation and comparable resources....

We know that victims are not put first, and I'm not sure that people understand the importance of information to victims of crime.

The fact that these terrible criminals are judged to be progressing through Canada's corrections system while the voices of victims of crime are somehow sidelined and, in a way, silenced is concerning and should be shocking to us all.

This is a non-partisan issue. It is about doing what is right. Keeping dangerous offenders, serial killers and mass murderers like Paul Bernardo, Dellen Millard, Mark Smich and Luka Magnotta in a maximum-security prison is common sense. Simply put, there should have been no way that any of these criminals were ever downgraded and transferred from a maximum-security prison to a medium-security prison, yet on May 29, 2023, this is exactly what happened to Paul Bernardo.

The CSC decision to transfer Bernardo to a medium-security prison was met with immediate and harsh public outrage on a national scale. Locally, both the cities of St. Catharines and Thorold passed municipal resolutions requesting that Correctional Service Canada and the Liberal government act. In the motion adopted by the City of St. Catharines, it states:

...City Council request[s] that the Government of Canada review and consider legislation changes to ensure transparency in the corrections and parole system and examine the guidelines around moving dangerous offenders and sadistic psychopaths who have not exhibited any remorse, empathy or insight into their crimes into medium security prisons....

The mayor of Thorold also wrote and expressed this:

The gravity of Mr. Bernardo's crimes, and the devastating impact they had on the lives of innocent individuals and their families, cannot be understated. Our community, along with the wider Niagara region, continues to bear the scars left by these reprehensible actions. It is of utmost importance that we prioritize public safety and ensure that those who pose a significant risk to society are appropriately confined and monitored.

I could not agree more. Decades since these heinous crimes were committed, the nightmares and scars from the terror still linger in the communities they impacted in St. Catharines, as well as in the Niagara communities that I represent in Niagara Falls and Niagara-on-the-Lake.

The Liberal government must answer these questions. Why are these prison transfers happening? Why are they benefiting Canada's most evil criminals and to what end? Is it the desire of the Liberal government to continue the progression of these dangerous offenders, serial killers and mass murderers until they are transferred to minimum-security prison or until they are granted parole or lesser conditions?

Surely the Liberal government does not believe that the likes of Paul Bernardo, Dellen Millard, Mark Smich and Luka Magnotta should continue to be downgraded until they are out of the corrections system, or does it?

The Canadian justice and corrections system must be rebalanced to support law-abiding Canadians and victims of crime. That needs to be the goal, and Bill C-232 will help restore this balance, as well as the confidence of Canadians in their federal institutions. These CSC decisions to transfer dangerous offenders and mass murderers from maximum-security prison to medium-security prison undermines public confidence, erodes public trust and raises serious questions and debate about who the justice system serves and prioritizes: the victims, as it should, or the criminal.

Canadians know something is wrong when even CSC Commissioner Anne Kelly, the person responsible for these transfers, conceded this about Bernardo. She said, “The fact that he is at a medium-security institution does not negate the fact that he is a psychopath, and that he committed horrific and unspeakable crimes”.

There is also the former public safety minister's own reaction to the news about Bernardo's transfer. He was quoted by CBC as saying, “as a former federal prosecutor and as a Canadian...I was profoundly concerned and again shocked by this decision”. This was a quote from the former minister who was in charge. It does not come as a surprise then that shortly after this national debacle, Minister Mendicino was dropped by Justin Trudeau from cabinet.

Canadians are in disbelief about this whole thing. These comments are from the people who hold authority. They are the ones Canadians expect to run and competently manage Canada's corrections system and institutions like CSC to ensure and uphold public safety. Despite their own acknowledgements of how bad Paul Bernardo is, they carried on and moved forward as if nothing had happened and continue to allow these types of transfers to occur.

The new Liberal Minister of Public Safety has failed to take any action, and the same CSC commissioner has failed to reverse her decisions. Last week, the government announced she is leaving her role and will be replaced. Canadians will be watching closely to see what actions the new commissioner takes, or fails to take, in their new role.

The person who first contacted me and asked that I get involved to help on this issue was a close friend of one of Paul Bernardo's victims. Her name is Marcia Penner. In a letter she wrote to CSC Commissioner Anne Kelly, and I think she speaks for all Canadians, she stated:

Please help me understand how someone such as Paul Bernardo can be housed in a facility such as this. One of Canada’s most notorious killers. A psychopathic serial rapist. A designated DANGEROUS OFFENDER. Does any of this mean anything? I can only imagine the prisoners remaining in maximum security penitentiaries must be asking the same question. If someone who commits the worst of the worst crimes doesn’t qualify for the harshest conditions, then who does?

Marcia is right, and Bill C-232 is the solution to fix this major problem and do what is ultimately right. Bill C-232 also complements a larger Conservative effort, through several private members' bills, to combat the out-of-control crime wave Canadians are facing after a decade of bad Liberal policies that weakened our federal institutions like the CSC.

The Liberal government now talks about implementing needed justice reforms. Sadly, these reforms are required to fix the problems the Liberals created when they weakened provisions of previous Conservative legislation through bills such as Bill C-5, Bill C-75 and Bill C-83. There is hope. Two of my colleagues' bills, Bill C-243 and Bill C-242, resume their second reading debates soon. I am encouraged to see that both Bill C-225 and Bill C-221 have passed second reading and have been referred to committee for further study and consideration by parliamentarians. I am hopeful that Bill C-232 will follow suit and receive the widespread support of my hon. colleagues to reach committee as well.

Enough is enough. It is time we start rebalancing the corrections system to weigh victims' considerations more strongly, restore Canadians' trust and confidence in our federal institutions and return dangerous offenders and mass murderers like Paul Bernardo, Dellen Millard, Mark Smich and Luka Magnotta to maximum-security prisons where they rightly belong. With the support of colleagues in the House, we can make this happen. We can respond to the calls from our constituents, communities and, more importantly, the families of those victims of crime.

I stand in my place today because I made a promise to see what I could do to help correct a horribly wrong decision made by the government. I ask my colleagues to support this effort. Working together, we can accomplish great things and do so in memory of those so tragically lost.

Motions in Amendment

[Jonathan Rowe, Conservative, Terra Nova—The Peninsulas, NL]

Mr. Speaker, last year when I was nominated to be a Conservative candidate, I had an interesting conversation with Ches Crosbie. Mr. Crosbie asked me a tough question. He asked me, out of the four Conservative platform pillars, which one I thought would be the most important to my constituents. I took a moment and I thought real long and hard. Axe the tax, stop the crime, build the homes and fix the budget are all very important issues, but in my rural riding, where people have to travel long distances for work, drive large SUVs to handle our terrible roads and use pickup trucks to do their daily tasks, I figured axing the tax would be one of the biggest concerns in rural Newfoundland. Boy, was I wrong.

It did not take long for me to realize that stopping crime was one of the biggest issues facing rural Newfoundland and Labrador. While rural Newfoundland is not riddled with extortion like we see in many parts of Canada, families, people and business owners are living in fear. Over the summer, communities in Conception Bay North were devastated by forest fires that swept through their communities. Families, seniors and people all along that shore had to leave their homes to find a place to stay. Unfortunately, many of them lost their homes and have yet to return.

However, that was not the first fire they experienced. That was the 13th fire in less than three months. Multiple people in that community reported the fire previously as potential arson. Unfortunately, nothing was done. Even during the fires, I was told that people were sneaking in to the evacuated zones and breaking into homes. Imagine that: thieves brazen enough to steal from the people who are suffering the most.

Now, even while the community tries to rebuild, crime is rampant. I am being told that truckloads of two-by-fours are being stolen. Tools are being stolen. This is on a regular basis. They are not one-time events, but happening repeatedly. People from the area are calling and begging me, and actually begging all of us, all of us parliamentarians, to work together to solve this problem. Not only do they ask for increased policing, but they also ask for increased bail reform. Even everyday Canadians know that all these crimes are being committed over and over by the same people, and that the heart of the problem is in the justice system. They are desperate for change. They have even taken it upon themselves to circulate petitions to call for change, a petition that I will be glad to present here in the House of Commons at a later date.

On the opposite end of my riding, they are having the same issue. The Town of Carmanville invited me to a regional event where people from neighbouring communities voiced their significant concerns about crime in the area. Parents in the meeting told me they were worried about letting their kids walk down the road to their friends' house nearby because of the increased number of intoxicated drivers due to the excessive amount of drugs in the area.

What makes the situation worse is that the town of Carmanville and the area feel completely abandoned. Their police station is empty. They have one police station and three RCMP homes that are maintained and heated but are completely empty. Quite frankly, they are abandoned. During the lost Liberal decade, their police station has become completely eroded of personnel, but why? Why is it so hard for the government to secure police officers?

When I chat with officers, a common theme comes up: Crime is up, but morale is down. Police are so frustrated with the justice system and their constant game of cat and mouse that they retire as soon as they can, eager to leave the force and oftentimes even having to go on sick leave due to the mental health strain this crime cycle creates. Imagine them getting up every day, putting on a uniform and holstering a gun, not knowing if they will return to see their families that evening and risking their lives just for the criminals they catch to get a slap on the wrist and a get-out-of-jail-free card.

This massive increase in crime has even changed the fabric of our Newfoundland culture. Homeowners in the safest communities are locking their doors, not just at nighttime but even during the day while they are in their own homes. This was not unheard of 10 years ago, but in some communities, it may have even been considered rude and unfriendly to do so.

Parents are more and more fearful of letting their children play in nearby parks and playgrounds. Cultural activities like mummering and even trick-or-treating are rapidly eroding as the risks become higher and higher. Cabin owners leave their properties not knowing what they will come back to, with break and enter becoming the norm. This is all due to 10 years of Liberal failed policies.

When I saw and heard of crime rates going up and heard of these violent crimes, I always thought it was a sign of the times, that it was the way the world is. I figured that our culture must be producing more criminals. Once I got to Ottawa, I learned what was really behind this change. It did not happen because of a whim or because of changes on TV. It happened because the Liberal government introduced the principle of restraint.

This principle instructed judges, who preside over thousands of bail applications, to release accused criminals at the earliest opportunity and with the least restrictive restrictions. Conservatives feel that this is the core of the problem. Unfortunately, Liberals have decided to keep this language pertaining to the principle of restraint in the bill, keeping their soft-on-crime, hug-a-thug mentality.

Additionally, the bill fails to get tough enough on conditional sentencing orders. Criminals who are involved in robbery, gun and trafficking offences are still able to access house arrest. Over and over again, at doors and meetings across my riding, I hear that people are sick and tired of these criminals getting arrested and getting nothing but a soft slap on the wrist. There is even a joke. People say that the criminals get home before the police are off duty. Crime should not be a joking matter. We need to get serious about it.

Firstly, we need to get rid of this idea that criminals should get the least amount of punishment allocated by the law. If judges, courts and prosecutors feel that these criminals deserve more time, they should get more time. Conservatives want to repeal the principle of restraint and replace it with the principle of prioritizing community and public safety, as set out in our private member's bill, the jail not bail act.

Conservatives want to restore mandatory minimums for kidnapping, human trafficking, extortion, arson and other serious violent crimes. When we speed, we know the consequences. There is a fine we must pay. It is a minimum, not an amount that we can negotiate. Why should human trafficking, one of the most horrendous crimes imaginable, not have the same idea instead of minimum consequences?

Let us talk about bail reform. “Jail not bail” is something that Conservatives have chanted alone for years. It was not until election time that the Liberals were pressured by the public to do something and said they would consider bail reform. Unfortunately, the bill misses key aspects at the core of the problem.

Conservatives know that judges and courts need to consider the full criminal history and outstanding charges of criminals. Many Canadians, including myself, are shocked that this is not already mandated. Conservatives want to do exactly that. If we were in government, we would mandate courts to consider the full criminal history of the accused. It is just common sense.

Here is the most unbelievable part. Right now, sometimes, when someone is out on bail, they may need surety, someone who supervises them, someone to vouch for them, who will ensure that they will be back for court and that they will behave while on bail, yet, right now, the guarantor, the supervisor, could have been convicted in the past. Conservatives want to make sure that these criminals out on bail are not being supervised by other criminals.

Conservatives want to require courts to enforce guarantor obligations and ensure that they do not have an indictable conviction. Additionally, Conservatives want to give the courts the power to make non-residents surrender their passports in situations they feel are appropriate, reducing the chances of the accused skipping bail and continuing criminal activity in other countries.

Canadians are asking us to work together. Although we do not believe that the bill does enough, we are proud of the inputs and additions that Conservatives made to the bill during the process. We will continue to advocate for stricter penalties, for more policing and for a justice system that protects the community, not criminals.

Opposition Motion—Serious crimes and refugee claims

[Dalwinder Gill, Conservative, Calgary McKnight, AB]

Mr. Speaker, Conservatives have also introduced Bill C-242, the jail not bail act, brought forward by the Conservative member for Oxford. This bill would reform Canada's bail system by making public safety the primary consideration, expanding reverse onus for serious violent offences and tightening rules for repeat offenders. Conservatives will not accept a Canada where families and businesses feel unsafe in their own communities.

For 10 years, Liberal soft-on-crime policies and bail reforms have weakened sentencing, reduced consequences for violent offences and made it easier for repeat violent offenders to terrorize our streets. We will fight to pass our anti-extortion legislation, restore serious penalties for violent and gun-related crimes and repeal the Liberal laws that put criminals above public safety.

Canadians should never be forced to live in fear, to change their daily routines or to feel unsafe within the walls of their own homes. This is why we are calling on the government to adopt our Conservative plan to end extortion and protect Canadian families and businesses.

[Dalwinder Gill, Conservative, Calgary McKnight, AB]

Mr. Speaker, as always, it is an honour to rise in the House on behalf of my constituents in northeast Calgary. I want to speak today on an issue that hits very close to home and has deeply impacted members of the South Asian community across Canada. Families and small businesses are living in fear as extortion has become rampant across the country. Communities in Surrey, Brampton and northeast Calgary have become all too familiar with these threats and intimidation.

In many cases, extortion begins with a phone call from an unknown or international phone number. The perpetrator makes a demand for thousands of dollars and, in some cases, millions of dollars. They threaten to harm an individual's home, business or family. They drop details about the individual's place of residence or the names of their children and their school. They warn that going to the police will only make matters worse.

In recent months, numerous families and small business owners have come to my constituency office after receiving extortion calls. They were shaken, afraid and unsure where to turn. Some told me that they did not know whether to report the threats. The safety of my constituents is my top priority in the House, and I will continue speaking on this issue until something gets done.

In another case just last month, a father in northeast Calgary received a phone call over WhatsApp from an international number. The man on the line asked for thousands of dollars and claimed to know about his seven-year-old son and where he went to school. Like many others, this call was meant to terrify him into compliance and silence.

Crime and extortion statistics in Canada have become so bad over the last 10 years that it is truly hard to fathom how things got so out of hand. Since the Liberals took power in 2015, violent crime has risen 54%, gun crime has risen 130% and extortion has risen by 330%. In my neighbouring province of British Columbia, extortion has risen by 480% since 2015. These are truly unfathomable numbers.

Canada's extortion crisis is not an isolated issue and it did not happen overnight. It is the result of years of weakness in our criminal justice system and in the bail and sentencing laws. Liberal bills such as Bill C-5 and Bill C-75 treated perpetrators like victims and prioritized criminals' rights over public safety. These policies of lenient sentencing and reduced consequences have emboldened criminals and signalled to international crime networks, including the Lawrence Bishnoi gang, that Canada is an easy target for extortion-related crime.

These Liberal policies have directly contributed to the rise in crime Canadians are now facing across the country. In my hometown of Calgary, police are currently investigating 21 extortion cases, including recent shootings in Redstone and Taradale. I want to thank the Calgary Police Service, the Alberta Law Enforcement Response Team and all of our first responders for their bravery and work ethic in dealing with these matters. Their work sends a clear message to scammers, thugs, criminals and terrorists that our communities will not take threats and will not be silenced.

In Surrey, British Columbia, there have been over 30 reported extortion attempts already this year. Compared to last year's total of 133, Surrey is on pace to have 500 extortion attempts by the end of this year.

Like many families across Canada, a Brampton household began the new year with hope and optimism. Within days, that hope was shattered when they received an extortion demand for half a million dollars and later had multiple shots fired at their home. Incidents like this leave families shaken and communities wondering whether their own homes could be next. This pattern is being seen in communities across Canada. It is why city councils in Brampton and Surrey have asked the Liberal government to step up its response to extortion.

I agree with the mayor of Brampton, Patrick Brown, who has said that the Liberals must recognize extortion as a national public safety issue and take immediate action to address it. Mayor of Surrey, Brenda Locke, has been equally vocal, stating that “our laws are simply too weak” and that “strong federal leadership” is needed to protect communities and restore public confidence. I could not agree more.

This is why, over a year ago, the Conservative member for Edmonton Gateway introduced Bill C-381, the protection against extortion act, which set out a clear plan to address this crisis. The Liberals voted it down, choosing to side with criminals instead of communities. Conservatives have also introduced Bill C-242—

[Amanpreet S. Gill, Conservative, Calgary Skyview, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I have come across so many police officers. They are doing their job, but in this judicial system, while the police are still filing their complaints, the criminals are getting out on bail. This is where we have to work to change the laws. The member for Oxford brought forward Bill C-242 on jail not bail for criminals, and that is where we have to work together to tackle these criminals.

[Brad Redekopp, Conservative, Saskatoon West, SK]

Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise today on this motion we put forward in the House.

I have had the privilege of travelling to Rwanda multiple times. It is a beautiful country. When I say I am going to Rwanda or have been to Rwanda, people look at me with shock on their faces, because they have an image of a country that was rocked by genocide 32 years ago, which it was. It was a tragic thing, but the country has been rebuilt. It is a beautiful country, hilly and tropical. The fruit there is amazing, and so are the people. It is now a very safe country that is well developed. There are roads and buildings. They have a beautiful soccer centre and a basketball centre. It is an amazing place. They had the cycling UCI Road World Championships there last year, which was the first time ever in an African country.

When I talk to Rwandans about what it is like in Canada, they do not believe me. The conversations are quite interesting. I talk about things like homelessness and how we can see homeless people in any major city, tent cities, people cooking on fires in our cities in Canada. When I tell that to people in Rwanda, they do not believe me. I talk about the drug use we see in our cities, the fentanyl use, people literally dying on our streets and the way our government actually supports that by providing tools and facilitating the use of drugs and in some cases giving hard drugs to people. They cannot believe that. One certainly does not see that on the streets of Kigali in Rwanda.

The obvious consequence of these things is that crime has increased since 2015 in Canada. Violent crime is up 55%, firearms crime is up 130%, extortion has skyrocketed and is up 330% across the country, sexual assaults are up 76%, and homicides are up 29%. This is the result of some of the changes that the Liberal government has made. It is hard to imagine that when one is sitting in a country like Rwanda. We have a perception that it should be a problem in Rwanda, but it is actually a problem here, not there.

Then I tell Rwandans that police are increasingly powerless. Any of us who have talked to police officers will hear every time that they got into policing to catch the bad guy and put him in jail. They are increasingly frustrated that they cannot do that because courts are releasing the bad guy. It is frustrating police officers to the point that they do not even bother to arrest some people for crimes now because it just does not matter.

Why is this happening? It is partly because of Bill C-5, which took away mandatory minimums. It allowed judges the freedom to give lesser sentences, which has happened across the board, and not for little things; it is for serious things such as gun trafficking, robbery with a firearm and drug trafficking. These kinds of offences are now not subject to mandatory minimums, and judges are free to give whatever lenient sentence they may choose.

Bill C-75 was a big expansion of bail. It was the bill that not allowed but actually required judges to consider the least possible thing they could do to a criminal. There is a thing called “the principle of restraint” that was introduced in the bill, for police and courts to ensure that release at the earliest opportunity is favoured over detention. It forces our criminal justice system to release criminals at the earliest possible opportunity. This is how we arrived at the revolving-door bail situation, where people are arrested and end up back out on the streets.

These are the things that have been done by the government that have caused crime to increase in our country and light sentences to prevail. The consequences of crime are gone. We have completely lost control of crime in our country. When I say these things to a person from Rwanda, they are shocked. This is not the view of Canada that they have, but it is the true Canada that we do have.

On the immigration side, we have to remember that somebody who is not a citizen of Canada showing up at our borders does not have the right to become Canadian. Canadians are the ones who decide who can become Canadian. Canadians are the ones who decide that we should allow certain people to come into our country and in certain quantities. Those are our decisions to make. They are no one else's.

For many years, Canada had a consensus on immigration. If someone is not an indigenous person, then they quite likely have an immigrant in their background somewhere. My grandparents came here 100 years ago, so I am the product of immigration to this country, as are most of us here who are not indigenous people. Canadians were happy and comfortable with that. We had a system that picked the brightest and the best people because that is what benefited Canada the most. If one talks to an economist, they will say that we should be selecting people who have the potential to earn higher-than-average incomes in our country to bring all of us up as a country.

This worked well, but we also left room to help those in need. We all recognize that there are refugees who come to our country, and we need to help those people too. This system worked, and immigrants would be the first to say that.

Then the Liberals completely lost control. They allowed in way too many people, and we have seen the impacts of that on our housing, our jobs and our health care. Trying to buy a house is expensive. Trying to pay rent is expensive. Jobs are hard to find. Our unemployment rate for youth is very high.

It has overwhelmed our system. Sometimes people forget about this, but we have a system in our country that was designed to process tens of thousands of people a year. It has now been dealing with millions of people a year, and it cannot keep up with that volume. Something like security screening, for example, is woefully inadequate and behind. As a result, someone can sneak into our country as a criminal and we probably will not catch it. This is a sad thing to say, but it is the reality. We see it every day.

We also have low-wage people coming into the country, which suppresses wages. It gives employers an opportunity to have a temporary foreign worker they can pay a low amount of money to, so Canadians do not have jobs. This is why we have such high unemployment among the youth in our country. Those same youth are faced with high rents while not having a job. They cannot find a place to live.

At the same time as that, we are letting in criminals, as I said, because we cannot really screen properly. We have, for example, IRGC members from Iran here in Canada, who have been able to come here, launder their money and have a pretty good life, and they should not be able to do that. We have scam artists who are taking advantage of the immigration system.

Let us remember that immigrants are not the criminals here. Immigrants are not the problem. There is a very small fraction of people who are the problem, but when we have a system we can take advantage of, bad things happen.

This leads me to the unholy marriage of an out-of-control crime system with an out-of-control immigration system. This is where we find ourselves. We talk a lot about immigration, and some of my constituents do not necessarily have experience with this, so I want to read this because it is shocking. This is an example of an extortion letter. It says:

WARNING...we are...gang members, we want our share from your busineses like protection money. as you seen on news on November...two shotting on houses...were targeted because we asked them [little] money they...denied.... We want...peacefully from you this amount if you...do...business here in abbotsford—

This is in Abbotsford.

—you have no other way...please make sure do not contact...POLICE....

We asking only 2 million...in cash...here or we might get...INDIA we have links all over do not ignore us, it will efect you realy bad. we will contact you next month we gave you 1 month to decide....

This an example of an extortion letter that people are getting, and it is not just one. There were 36 incidents like that in Surrey in the month of January alone. There was a situation on January 19 where a business received a message like that, and their place was shot up overnight. People do not necessarily even report these things. Also in Surrey, there were 15 suspects of this type of crime who were arrested by the police, and they immediately claimed asylum.

This a problem in our system. The asylum system is broken. There are 300,000 people in our asylum queue right now waiting for a hearing. That is the size of Saskatoon. The equivalent of the entire city of Saskatoon is currently waiting for nearly four years, which is how long it is going to take to process them. Because our system cannot process them, 100,000 of those people are simply waiting for security clearance.

This why NDP Premier David Eby from British Columbia called the situation “ludicrous”. He said that something had to change, that something has to be different. We proposed these changes. My colleague from Calgary Nose Hill proposed a change like this to Bill C-12 that would have barred asylum claims from people who are convicted of a crime. Premier Eby actually wants to go further by barring people from claiming asylum if they are in a judicial process for a serious crime. We think that is a good idea. We want to partner with the House to make that kind of thing happen.

Let us remember that Bill C-5 removed mandatory minimums for extortion with a handgun. There are also sentencing discounts, which allow judges to reduce sentences. There are multiple examples of this. It happens all the time. We need to fix this by undoing Bill C-5 and Bill C-75 so that there are true consequences. The member for Oxford brought in Bill C-242, which is the jail not bail act.

We need to fix Bill C-12, as I just described, but we also need to implement Bill C-220, which is from the member for Calgary Nose Hill. It would forbid judges from giving sentencing discounts where it impacts deportation. Criminals who are convicted of a crime greater than six months are subject to deportation, so judges are giving them sentences of less than six months so they are not subject to deportation.

We need to fix this. Something is wrong in Canada. We have to get crime and immigration back under control. The motion today would do that. For the benefit of Canadians, all Canadians, especially young ones, we need to do this today.

Budget 2025 Implementation Act, No. 1

[Amarjeet Gill, Conservative, Brampton West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, that is a wonderful question. My community in Brampton is really suffering through extortion, shootings and criminal activities. Not a day passes that I do not hear from the people of Brampton that somebody got shot or someone got an extortion call. Recently, I would like to mention, I got a call from a resident who said he had received a call for $1 million in extortion money. This is unacceptable in this country.

The soft-on-crime Liberal policies have created this mess, and we are suggesting Bill C-242, which would address all the issues. It is called jail not bail. I will ask all the members in Parliament to support this bill so that we can control crime in Brampton and across the country.

Bail and Sentencing Reform Act

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak about Bill C‑14 on the issue of bail and justice system reform more broadly, which is something that the Standing Committee on the Status of Women is currently studying. I proposed that the committee study the use of section 810 of the Criminal Code of Canada to see whether it is appropriate in terms of ensuring the safety of women who are victims of domestic violence, in particular. Together with the Conservatives, we also wanted to look at bail and other aspects of the justice system to see whether it adequately meets the needs of women who are victims of domestic violence.

I remember my female Liberal colleagues telling me there was no need to do this study because a bill was on its way that would deal with violence against women. I expressed reservations because I saw no reason not to study the justice system concurrently at the Standing Committee on the Status of Women, focusing specifically on women's lack of confidence. In too many cases, women do not report their attackers because they have lost faith in the system. I said that we could go ahead with the study and then look at the bill. Now I realize that what I am going to talk about today are the reservations that Bloc Québécois members will express in committee when we have the opportunity, we hope, to take a somewhat closer look at this bill. That was my introduction.

First, let us consider the broader context. The Liberal government is introducing Bill C-14 to make it harder to get bail. The bill is a political response to high-profile cases involving violent repeat offenders, including certain inmates released in Manitoba. As we know, there are even places in Canada where domestic violence against women is said to have reached epidemic proportions. This is a serious issue. We acknowledge it. We know that the Conservatives are pushing for an even tougher approach, particularly with Bill C-242. They often take a populist, "three strikes and you're out" approach. Would that necessarily be helpful? We are not so sure.

What we are seeing right now is that the system is already under pressure. Here are some statistics: In 2022-23, 72.56% of people in custody in Canada were awaiting trial. That was an all-time high. In 2019 and 2020, it was 64.89%. That represents an increase of almost 8% in three years. In addition, only 26.51% remained in custody following a conviction. This suggests that the problem is not bail, or at least, that remains to be determined. Rather, the problem is a slow-moving system and a lack of resources.

Bill C-14 specifies that the principle of restraint "does not require the accused to be released". That is in clause 14, but it goes against the presumption of innocence and the St-Cloud, Antic and Zora decisions, which define release as the rule and detention as the exception. We in the Bloc Québécois are concerned about the decline in judicial independence and judges having less discretionary power. We want to study that aspect in committee.

There is also an increase in the number of instances where the burden of proof is reversed. Bill C‑14 increases the number of situations where the accused must prove that they can be released. These include motor vehicle theft, extortion and breaking and entering a dwelling-house. Human trafficking offences are also being added. I would be interested in looking into this a little more, because right now, the All Party Parliamentary Group to End Modern Slavery and Human Trafficking, a non-partisan group that I am part of and that is studying this issue, is seeing statistics that show a worrying increase. Could this bill address a growing problem? We will have to see. There are also offences involving choking, suffocation and strangulation during an assault. Several victims have told us about these horrors. This seems to be a recurring theme in assault cases. In committee, we heard some rather disturbing testimony from victims. There is also a risk of pretrial detention turning into automatic detention in a large number of cases. We therefore need to study this further.

The Bloc Québécois supports the bill, but I would say we have concerns. We want to vote to send the bill to committee, but, as I said, we have many reservations. The main thing we want to do is protect victims at all costs without undermining the presumption of innocence. It is about finding a balance.

I would like to turn to another subject and talk about the real causes of crime.

Experts have repeatedly said that the housing crisis is throwing a wrench in the works. There is clearly a compelling connection. When a woman cannot find housing, she will not leave the cycle of domestic violence and poverty because she does not want to end up on the street. Addictions are also exacerbating this crisis. Because federal health transfers are lacking, we cannot seriously address this issue, which should be seen as a public health issue.

Insufficient psychosocial services is also among the causes. We use a different model in Quebec, where health and public services are combined. As I often say in committee, Quebec's community groups benefit from the system we set up, rather than relying exclusively on a hospital-centred approach. At least, that is our hope. Our system of community groups and psychosocial services are an integral part of what a victim care pathway should provide.

Extreme poverty also drives people to commit crime. Once again, I see a connection with the fact that it keeps women in a cycle of domestic violence. Last Friday, I took part in a women's finance day organized back home, in Granby. I heard powerful accounts from women who are now successful, but were once victims of violence, unable to escape their situation because they were trapped in a cycle of poverty. Once they decided to empower themselves economically, to lift themselves out of poverty, find a job and develop their personal wealth, they managed to break free from the cycle of violence.

Where does the responsibility lie? The federal government is amending the Criminal Code, but justice is administered by Quebec and the provinces, which lack funding. This is often overlooked, but it is another example of a fiscal imbalance that is making it hard to hire judges. As we have seen, the federal government is dragging its feet on appointing them. It is not great at judicial appointments. Sometimes its appointments even flout the government's own rules. The fiscal imbalance also undermines reasonable wait times and the availability of correctional and clinical services.

Some aspects of Bill C‑14 are problematic, including for example the tacit withdrawal of the ladder principle. There are too many obligations imposed on judges, which creates a risk of automatic justice. Mandatory consecutive sentences can also lead to injustice. There is a problematic provision in the Youth Criminal Justice Act. Specifically, there is some confusion regarding how time served is calculated. This will have to be studied in committee. We must not throw the baby out with the bathwater. We would be curious to see how this could be improved.

Ultimately, the Bloc Québécois is proposing a real fight against organized crime, which includes a registry of criminal organizations. That is important. We also want to ban these criminal groups from displaying their emblems, which is also important. We want a reverse onus for the seizure of the proceeds of crime. We want it to be illegal for gangs to recruit young people, because that is a serious problem in the Montreal area.

We are also proposing to regulate the use of the Jordan decision for the most serious crimes. That was mentioned in committee. It is not right that, because of delays, perpetrators of domestic violence against women get away with it. This should be regulated, at least for certain crimes such as sexual assault. We are also proposing that the religious exemption for hate speech be removed.

Finally, Bill C-14 is filled with good intentions, but it also includes several risks. The bill could threaten the presumption of innocence, increase the number of innocent people being detained and undermine confidence in the justice system. My colleague from Rivière-du-Nord, who is the justice critic, could explain this even better than I can. The Bloc Québécois wants to strengthen security without sacrificing fundamental rights.

I will close my speech by providing a few interesting statistics.

In Quebec, in 2022, women accounted for 89% of victims of sexual assault reported by the police, according to the Institut national de santé publique du Québec, or INSQ. Reported cases of women victims of sexual assault is 157.5 incidents per 100,000 women, compared to 19 incidents per 100,000 men. In Quebec, one in four women, or 25%, aged 15 and older reported having been sexually assaulted by someone other than an intimate partner. The rate for men is approximately 6%. In Quebec, in 2021, women accounted for 76.4% of victims of domestic violence, or offences committed by an intimate partner. Also in 2021, individuals aged 25 to 39 accounted for 48.2% of victims of offences committed in an intimate context. The rate was 725.3 per 100,000 among people aged 25 to 29.

I also have a relevant example from the news in Quebec. In March 2025, the Regroupement des maisons pour femmes victimes de violence conjugale, a coalition of women's shelters, issued a press release calling on the government to address the inadequacy of legislative measures and resources to protect women who are victims of violence.

With that, I will now answer my colleagues' questions.

[Doug Shipley, Conservative, Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON]

Mr. Speaker, perhaps I should take a minute or two to thank the great people of Barrie who attended the Barrie Santa Claus parade this past weekend, even in the rain. It was great to see everybody out there. It was nice, a good parade. I thank the Greater Barrie Chamber of Commerce for putting it on.

Let us get into the fun stuff. I am pleased to rise today to speak on behalf of the great people of Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte about Bill C-14.

Bill C-14 seeks to amend the Criminal Code, the Youth Criminal Justice Act and the National Defence Act to clarify that the principle of restraint introduced by the Liberal government does not require release. It also proposes to expand reverse onus offences and would direct courts to weigh the number and gravity of outstanding charges when determining bail. Finally, it would add new aggravating factors, mandate certain consecutive sentences, restrict house arrest for sexual offenders and strengthen youth custody and disclosure powers.

Conservatives have been pushing for meaningful changes to fix our broken bail system for years, and I am pleased to see that steps are being taken to ensure safety in our communities after decades of decline under the Liberal government. In fact, this piece of legislation is a rare admission from the Liberal government that its approach to the criminal justice system has failed. By tabling this legislation, it is acknowledging the 41% increase in the violent crime severity index in the past decade and the increases in homicide, sexual assault and extortion offences, which happened under its watch.

Residents in my community and across Canada are living in fear. Communities that were once peaceful and welcoming are now plagued by crime. The downtown core of almost every major city in Canada is overwhelmed by drug use, break-ins and public disorder. The numbers do not lie. Since 2015, violent crime is up 55%, firearms crime has surged by 130%, extortion has skyrocketed by 330%, sexual assaults are up 76% and homicides have risen by 29%.

The Macdonald-Laurier Institute recently released the “Urban Violent Crime Report”, which studied the crime rates in 20 of Canada's largest census metropolitan areas. The results are shocking. Over the past decade, the violent crime rate and sexual assault rate increased in all 20 census metropolitan areas. Notably, the violent crime severity index is up by 71% in Kitchener, 63% in Quebec City and 61% in St. Catharines. These are not just numbers. These troubling statistics represent shattered lives, broken families and communities living in fear.

How did we get here? The Liberal government introduced soft-on-crime legislation like Bill C-5 and Bill C-75, which gave high priority to releasing repeat violent offenders and took away mandatory jail time for certain violent crimes, unleashing a crime wave across the country. Specifically, Bill C-75 enshrined the principles of restraint in law, which direct the courts to release offenders at the earliest reasonable opportunity and under the least onerous conditions. Bill C-5 abolished most mandatory minimum sentences and made house arrest a possibility for serious, heinous crimes like sexual assault and drug trafficking.

In 2023, the Liberal government tabled Bill C-48, which expanded reverse onus provisions but did not make it more difficult to get bail and did nothing to make it harder for repeat violent offenders to get bail.

I have talked to police services across the country and have been on ride-alongs in several cities from coast to coast, and I hear the same thing time and time again, which is that a very small number of people are responsible for the majority of crimes. These are offenders who are arrested and released the same day and go on to commit crimes while on release. These individuals are placing a strain on our courts, our communities and our first responders.

We witnessed a string of violent incidents over the summer, including the tragic murder of Bailey McCourt by her ex-husband just hours after he was released on bail following an assault conviction. In my own community, OPP Constable Greg Pierzchala, a Barrie resident, was ambushed and murdered by a violent repeat offender who was out on bail and under a lifetime firearms ban.

Just last year, Constable Jim Peters, a Barrie police officer, was stabbed while on duty by a repeat violent offender who was on probation at the time of the stabbing. Thankfully, Jim has recovered. In the two years leading up to this incident, the individual responsible had been arrested and released 17 times and had over 100 interactions with the Barrie Police Service.

Recently, Tom Stamatakis, president of the Canadian Police Association, appeared before the justice committee. I asked him how incidents like these are affecting the mental health of officers on the front lines. He told the committee that officers are being assaulted every day by repeat offenders. He shared a horrifying story from April, when an offender attempted to set a police officer on fire by pouring a flammable liquid on him during an arrest attempt.

Thomas Carrique, who is the OPP commissioner and president of the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, told the justice committee something similar. He stated:

When these perpetrators are brought before the courts, and when they are released and the officers can clearly see an elevated risk—they're released into communities, and they further victimize innocent, law-abiding Canadians, including police officers in the lawful execution of their duties—it is very demoralizing for our officers.

Police services are facing serious recruitment and retention challenges because of the extraordinary risks officers face when trying to apprehend these individuals. This is not just a public safety crisis, but it is a mental health crisis for those on the front lines. Officers are exhausted and demoralized; they are leaving the profession in record numbers. Who suffers? It is every Canadian who depends on them for safety. These tragedies are not isolated and did not happen in a vacuum. They are a result of dangerous offenders' being released on bail, time and time again, because of the Liberal government's catch-and-release bail laws.

While the Liberal government was denying that there were any issues with our bail system, Conservatives were fighting for solutions. In just this session, Conservatives have introduced several pieces of legislation to address skyrocketing crime rates, including Bill C-242, the jail not bail act, to extend reverse onus for major crimes and protect first responders, and Bill C-246, which proposes to make a consecutive sentence mandatory for such crimes as sexual assault. The Liberal government has ignored or voted against both pieces of legislation.

While we welcome any constructive efforts to try to fix our broken bail system and bring safety back to our communities, Conservatives believe that the legislation does not go far enough. The most significant example of the legislation missing the mark is on the principle of restraint. Bill C-14 now confirms that restraint does not require release. However, it still provides a pathway to release and retains the directive to apply the least onerous conditions on an offender.

Conservatives believe that the principle of restraint clause should be replaced entirely by a clause that prioritizes public and community safety as the governing principle. We also believe that the bill does not reform sentencing in a truly meaningful way. Conservatives believe that we must restore mandatory minimum sentences for serious violent offences, including firearms, kidnapping, human trafficking, robbery, extortion with a firearm, arson and others. The repeal of these sentences under Bill C-5 was wrong and has led to crime and chaos in our communities.

Another point that we hope to see improvements on is what offences would be eligible for house arrest. We are very concerned that individuals charged with robbery, drug trafficking and firearms offences would still be eligible for house arrest under the legislation. That being said, it is promising to see changes proposed to the youth criminal justice system. Last session, while studying the auto theft crisis in Canada, we learned about the startling prevalence of young people involved in violent crimes.

Commissioner Thomas Carrique of the OPP noted that a significant number of youth are participating in organized auto theft rings, many of them armed.

Deputy Chief Robert Johnson of the Toronto Police Service told the committee that one-third of individuals arrested for carjacking in Toronto were young offenders.

Beyond auto theft, Clayton Campbell, president of the Toronto Police Association, recently informed the justice committee that in Toronto alone, more than a dozen youth were charged with murder in the past year and 102 illegal firearms were seized from youth in the city. This underscores the urgent need to update our justice and bail laws to reflect the changing landscape of offender profiles in Canada.

Conservatives will work collaboratively to ensure that the legislation is strengthened and genuinely achieves the goal of keeping our communities safe. We hope that all parties will come together during the committee process to pass reasonable amendments. Unless these changes are made, serious and dangerous offenders will continue to walk free, communities will remain at risk and families will continue to live in fear.

Canadians deserve better. They deserve a government that puts their safety first. They deserve a justice system that protects victims, not criminals. That is why we are calling on the Liberal government to work with us to end the scourge of crime, chaos and disorder in our streets. It is time to restore safety, accountability and justice for all Canadians. Conservatives will always stand on the side of victims, families and safe communities.

[Amanpreet S. Gill, Conservative, Calgary Skyview, AB]

Mr. Speaker, yes, it is very serious.

We introduced our bill, Bill C-242, from our member for Oxford. That is what we need to act on. We cannot release offenders back onto the streets. We have to be serious with respect to them.

We have seen what we have gone through in the last failed Liberal decade. The crime rate is skyrocketing. Just in Surrey alone, the extortion cases are up almost 550%. That is a very high number. We cannot have this in Canada.

[Amanpreet S. Gill, Conservative, Calgary Skyview, AB]

Mr. Speaker, we are taking crimes very seriously, even sexual crimes. Bill C-242, the jail not bail act, is entirely constitutional and covers everything.

On this side of the aisle, we are here to protect our women, our children and everyone, so all Canadians are safe on the streets, so Canadian homes are safe and so Canadians are not being threatened with calls.

[Amanpreet S. Gill, Conservative, Calgary Skyview, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the member for Oxford introduced the jail not bail act, which recognizes attacks on first responders as a major offence. The Liberals opposed it then recycled the idea.

While the Liberals would have Canadians believe this bill fixes the bail crisis, it does not. The person who commits a violent crime should not be sitting at home watching Netflix. They should be off of the streets. This is not a plan to protect Canadians; it is a press release pretending to be a bill. That is why Conservatives will work tirelessly to ensure that Bill C-14 scraps Liberal bail.

Thankfully, we have already put forward the real solution, Bill C-242, the Conservative jail not bail act, which was introduced by the member for Oxford. Unlike Bill C-14, which tinkers at the margins, Bill C-242 would reshape the system to protect the public. It would repeal the Liberal principle of restraint and replace it with the public safety primacy clause, thereby ending the culture of automatic release. The bill would create a major offence category that would trigger a true presumption of detention, not just a burden shift for offences such as firearm crimes, sexual offences, kidnapping, human trafficking, home invasions, robbery, extortion, arson and violent assault. The bill would tighten the risk standard and would require judges to consider the full criminal history of an accused person.

Bill C-242 also includes a 10-year look-back provision, so if someone convicted of a major violent offence were to commit another major violent offence while already on bail, they would face, with near certainty, a presumption of detention. It would strengthen surety rules by banning individuals with indictable convictions from acting as a guarantor and would require a passport surrender for non-residents where required. That is what a real plan to protect Canadians looks like, and it is what Conservatives are offering.

The need for this reform is urgent. A recent National Post poll found that more than half of Canadians no longer feel safe in their own neighbourhoods. In a country like ours, which is thriving, peaceful and proud, that should shock every member of the House. Tragically, that fear is entirely rational. People see what is happening around them. They see the revolving-door justice system, police arresting the same offenders repeatedly, crime scenes where their children play and a government that refuses to take responsibility.

We have a Minister of Public Safety who says, without embarrassment, “I'm not responsible for hiring of the [RCMP or CBA] officers”. If the minister responsible for public safety is not responsible for ensuring we have enough frontline officers, who is? This is the level of accountability Canadians are being offered.

In Calgary, especially in the downtown area, but throughout the entire city, residents have witnessed some of the worst increases in violent crime since the Liberal government took office. Transit stations have become unsafe. Small business owners are robbed repeatedly. Families are living in fear of being caught in gang-related shootings, and seniors feel trapped in their own homes. These are serious concerns from real people, and they deserve more than symbolic legislation.

Conservatives will not stop until we scrap Liberal catch-and-release laws. We will not stop until violent offenders face serious consequences and safe streets are the norm in Canada, not an exception.

The government has a choice. It can adopt a fully Conservative plan, stop the revolving-door bail system and protect Canadians, or it continue down this reckless path it embarked on a decade ago. Canadians already know which side Conservatives are on. We are on the side of victims, of families and of safe and strong communities. We are on the side of common sense.

It is time to scrap Liberal bail and restore public safety in this country. Conservatives and Canadians are ready. The only question that remains is whether the Liberals are ready.

[Amanpreet S. Gill, Conservative, Calgary Skyview, AB]

Mr. Speaker, Liberals have been copying Conservative proposals at a fascinating pace. Conservatives proposed extending reverse onus for major violent crimes. The Liberals voted against it, then copied it.

MP Khanna introduced the jail not bail act—

[Dalwinder Gill, Conservative, Calgary McKnight, AB]

Mr. Speaker, as always, it is an honour to rise in the House on behalf of the people of Calgary McKnight. I want to speak specifically to this bill today because the safety of Canadians is something I am very passionate about, as I am sure many of my colleagues, members of the House, are as well.

I believe that along with the cost of living crisis, the increasing crime level across Canada is the most important issue needing to be tackled by the current Parliament. This rising wave of crime is not just something I have observed; recent reports by Stats Canada tell the same story. Since the Liberals were elected in 2015, violent crime is up 55%, gun crime is up 130%, sexual assaults are up 76%, homicides are up 29% and extortion is up 330%.

In Calgary, roughly 75 repeat offenders are responsible for a large chunk of the crime calls all around the city. A Calgary police superintendent said that the same 75 criminals commit hundreds of disturbances, from assault with a weapon to store robbery and illegal drug use. We have heard stories like this from all across the country. In Vancouver, the same 40 offenders have been linked to over 6,000 negative police contacts. Calgary police inspectors say that these criminals just cycle through the system and continue to recommit offences upon release.

In my riding in northeast Calgary, there were five attacks on transit workers over the course of this summer. In one incident, a bus driver was pepper-sprayed and then beaten so badly that they were sent to the hospital in critical condition. In another case, a bus driver was stabbed and beaten, and, again, was taken to the hospital with life-threatening injuries.

This summer in Kelowna, a woman was murdered by her ex-husband just three hours after his assault conviction. He was supposed to have been released for a 10-week period while waiting on delivery of a psychiatric report, but only four kilometres away from the courthouse and only three hours later, he attacked his ex-wife and another woman with a hammer, ultimately killing his ex-wife.

Just last month, a mother of four was gunned down by her ex-boyfriend outside a Brampton strip mall while he was out on bail. Another man who was out on bail committed a mass stabbing in Manitoba this September and even killed his 18-year-old sister. The stories go on and on.

I commend the effort and bravery of our police and other first responders in fighting the rise in crime, but I am disappointed by the Liberal government's agenda to limit the ability of our justice system to keep dangerous offenders behind bars. The rise in crime has come in large part due to Liberal Bill C-75 and Bill C-5.

Passed in 2019, Bill C-75 forced judges to release offenders at the earliest possible opportunity and under the least onerous conditions. To make matters worse, in 2022, Bill C-5 further weakened deterrence by repealing numerous mandatory minimum sentences for serious offences like sexual assault. It also repealed mandatory jail time for serious gun crimes like extortion with a firearm.

Extortion has turned into one of the fastest-growing crimes in Canada. Police across the country have reported waves of threats against small business owners in communities like Brampton, Surrey, Vancouver and Calgary. Families in their homes are regularly shot at, firebombed and threatened. Just last week while I was in my riding, four separate constituents approached my office for help after receiving extortion calls. South Asian communities have faced the brunt of extortion cases in Canada, and authorities in B.C. even had to establish a special task force dedicated to these incidents.

Extortion has gotten so bad that over half of Canadians no longer feel safe in their homes. That is why, last year, my Conservative colleague, the member for Edmonton Gateway, introduced Bill C-381, the protection against extortion act. The bill would have delivered stricter mandatory minimums for extortion and treated arson as an aggravating factor. Shamefully, the Liberals watered it down and left Canadians stranded without the protection they desperately need.

More recently my colleague, the member for Oxford, introduced Bill C-242, the jail not bail act. Bill C-242 would prioritize public safety and the rights of survivors rather than the freedom of criminals. It would introduce tougher bail rules for major crimes like gun offences, sexual assault, robbery, kidnapping and human trafficking, and it would require judges to take an offender's full criminal record into account. Most importantly, Bill C-242 would stop the revolving door of bail by blocking repeat violent offenders from being released over and over again.

Now it seems that the Liberals are finally starting to listen to mayors, premiers and police associations from coast to coast calling for an end to the failed catch-and-release bail experiment. After Conservatives campaigned for four years to scrap Liberal bail, the Liberals have finally accepted the reality that the rights of survivors are more important than those of criminals.

Bill C-14 would expand reverse onus bail rules for certain violent and weapons-related offences and would ask judges to more intently consider community safety and an offender's history, but it would still keep the existing principles of restraint and the foundation of the bail system.

Considering the state of fear that Canadians currently live in and the fact that Canada's violent crime severity index has gone up by 41% in the last 10 years, I do not believe that Bill C-14 as it currently stands would go far enough to address the issues of bail reform or to restore the trust in our justice system to keep the public safe.

A Conservative plan for bail would prioritize public safety over the principle of restraint. We would restore mandatory minimums for firearms, sexual assault, kidnapping, human trafficking, robbery, extortion with a firearm, arson and other serious violent crimes. We would exclude people who have committed robbery, gun violence and trafficking, as well as property offenders, from being eligible for conditional sentencing. We would also mandate the consideration of criminal history instead of just encouraging judges to keep it in mind.

I believe that unless these changes are made, serious and dangerous offenders will continue to be released onto our streets to pose a threat to our communities.