Debates of Feb. 2nd, 2023

Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

The time provided for the consideration of Private Members' Business is now expired, and the order is dropped to the bottom of the order of precedence on the Order Paper.

A motion to adjourn the House under Standing Order 38 deemed to have been moved.

Public Safety

[Alex Ruff, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

Madam Speaker, I am here tonight to elaborate on something that is related to our opposition day motion today. It was a question I put to the government back in November about violent crime, Bill C-5 and the current Liberal government's soft-on-crime approach, which is not doing anything to make Canada safer.

In particular, I talked about how violent crime has risen 32% since the Liberals formed government, which equates to over 124,000 more violent crimes since they have been in government. I talked about local headlines of people “arrested again” for participation in a criminal organization, failure to comply with a probation order, 11 counts of knowledge of possession of a firearm while prohibited, two counts of disobeying a court order and two counts of breaching a weapons prohibition.

I am going to provide more local statistics from my own riding, because this is a prevalent problem. We see the media coverage all the time in our urban centres, but this problem of repeat offenders committing crimes is pervasive right across Canada.

Here is something from December 16, 2022, in my riding: “Charges laid in drive-by shooting”. Charges included possession of a weapon for dangerous purpose, careless use of firearm, assault with a weapon and discharging a firearm with intent. The key point is possession of a firearm contrary to a probation order. This individual also faces an attempted murder charge after a shooting in my riding back in August.

Here is another one: “Man suffers fractured skull in Hanover hammer attack”. I know the Prime Minister likes to speak about banning assault weapons. Well, guess what. A hammer used in an assault is an assault weapon, and good luck trying to ban all the hammers in the country. I do not think that is going to achieve much for public safety either. This happened at a convenience store. There were seven different charges, including several counts of breaching probation.

I have another one here, just miles from my own farm. It required significant resources from our law enforcement in the local area. A 53-year-old woman and a 48-year-old man were each charged with countless drug trafficking issues. The woman was additionally charged with two counts of disobeying a court order and failure to comply with a probation order. The man was additionally charged with two counts of breach of a weapons prohibition.

The fourth example is of a man in my riding. He has 25 weapons charges, with 15 different counts of a restricted or prohibited firearm and two breaches of a firearms prohibition.

Finally, I have one more example that required multiple police units to be involved. A 40-year-old man, a 63-year-old woman and a 24-year-old woman all got drug charges, and one was in possession of a firearm contrary to a prohibition order.

What is the government's solution? It removed mandatory minimum sentences for repeat offenders, including 10 of the 12 that were introduced by two former Liberal prime ministers, Trudeau senior and Chrétien. I do not know what the Liberal government had so wrong back in those days, but now we have seen every premier in this country table a letter to the government demanding bail reform. We also have police groups calling for stricter rules against these violent repeat offenders.

When are the Liberals going to repeal portions of Bill C-75 and Bill C-5 and stop targeting law-abiding firearms owners, sport shooters and farmers?

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Madam Speaker, my condolences to members of his community who have been impacted by gun violence. It would appear that gun-related crimes are a problem in the member's community and across Canada. Of course that is one of the reasons why we brought forward legislation to address that.

The federal government has taken a comprehensive approach to addressing a wide variety of factors related to gun and gang violence and other crimes. The government is continuing to make investments in the CBSA and the RCMP to strengthen border controls and to reduce the number of guns being smuggled by criminals across borders. These investments are working. Thanks to the hard-working members of the RCMP and the CBSA, we have seen an increase in gun seizures and arrests at our borders and we expect this trend to continue.

We are also continuing to work with provinces, territories, municipalities and indigenous communities to develop gun and gang prevention and intervention initiatives.

Some have suggested that the government is not treating firearms crime seriously because Bill C-5 repealed the mandatory minimum penalties for some firearms offences. Repealing these MMPs does not change the fundamental principle of sentencing that directs courts to impose penalties that reflect the seriousness of the offence and the offender's degree of responsibility. Courts will continue to be bound by jurisdiction in this area and impose stiff denunciatory sentences where appropriate. At the same time, these changes will provide the courts with flexibility and in doing so will address the negative consequences associated with the rigid, one-size-fits-all sentencing laws that applied to offences that address a broad range of conduct.

I would further note that Bill C-5 did not alter the fact that MMPs continue to apply to gun crimes involving the use of restricted or prohibited firearms, like handguns or those for any firearm-related offences linked to organized crime. Serious crimes will be met with serious consequences.

Canada has a strong and effective criminal justice system, including its bail laws, but we know that things can always be improved. Canadians deserve to be safe and to feel safe. We all have a role to play in protecting our communities. I want to reassure Canadians that if someone poses a significant threat to public safety, the laws tell us that they should not be released on bail.

I look forward to continuing to work with the Minister of Justice, provinces and territories, and parliamentarians, including on the upcoming study at the justice committee.

[Alex Ruff, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

Madam Speaker, maybe we will try a different tack. That response sounded very similar to the last time I got up here and asked the parliamentary secretary about a very similar issue.

We just spent the day debating the requirement for immediate bail reform. My question is to the parliamentary secretary. He stated earlier today, as has the minister, that he is committed to working with the premiers of all the provinces to address the needed bail reform in this country. Could he commit tonight to how quickly they are going to act on making these necessary changes to bail in Canada, and for once to start standing up and making this country safer versus, again, as I keep saying, bringing forth legislation like Bill C-21, which targets law-abiding Canadians, not going after criminals?

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

Madam Speaker, our Minister of Justice has been committed to this for many years, and for the record, the work started many months ago.

This past Monday, we passed a motion at our justice and human rights committed to study this issue. We are committed to working with our provincial and territorial counterparts. I can assure the House and Canadians that our minister is seized with the matter and will work diligently with everyone involved, including the opposition to constructively address the issues of bail reform.

The Environment

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Madam Speaker, the debate this evening stems from a question I asked the Minister of Environment back in early December, just after the Wild Species 2022 report was released and just before the COP15 biodiversity summit was held in Montreal.

The Wild Species 2022 report covers the status of over 50,000 species across the country. It is the fifth in a series published every five years since the year 2000. That report found that over 2,000 of these species are at risk of being lost in Canada. Over 100 of the species are found only in Canada and are at risk of extinction.

Bird populations are collapsing at very worrisome rates in North America and now are over 30% below the levels they were 50 years ago. That represents a loss of about three billion birds.

This loss of biodiversity is a huge strike to our environment, our ecosystems and our food supply. I pointed out to the minister that the Liberals have made almost no progress on their promises to protect 30% of our natural lands by 2030. Right now only about 12% of Canada's land and water habitats are protected, and we rank 128th in the world in that regard, behind the United States, and well behind countries such as Australia and New Zealand.

I specifically asked whether the government will introduce a biodiversity accountability bill to make sure we reach those critical targets. I will say off the top that I am happy that the minister made a commitment to do this at COP15 in Montreal, but I would like to spend some time outlining why we need to do it and what we need to do.

First of all, we need accountability. We have seen the progress made since the Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act. We need a similar legislative framework to make sure we are protecting our biodiversity. We need targets with plans to reach them. We have the basic targets for habitat protection, which are to preserve 30% of land and water by 2030. We need to flesh out those targets because simply going for acreage would likely result in failure.

We cannot simply set aside large plots of rock and tundra. Large tracks of land are important, but that has to be balanced with protections for smaller areas that represent critical habitat for species at risk. Most of those species at risk are found in southern Canada in the areas where we live and work. These are the ecosystems that we have altered to build cities, grow crops and extract natural resources.

Some of the most endangered ecosystems are the Carolinian forest in southwestern Ontario, the tall grass Prairies of southern Manitoba, the Garry oak savannahs of southern Vancouver Island and, in my home habitat, the desert grasslands of the south Okanagan Valley of British Columbia. These ecosystems and others like them need special attention and must not be forgotten in the government's plans.

Canada has been a global leader in developing the concept of key biodiversity areas, and we should fully implement this program here as part of our biodiversity strategy. A biodiversity accountability act would clarify what ecosystem protection will look like and delineate a clear plan on how to get there. Of course, it must have robust accountability measures to make sure that successive governments are held accountable to reaching those targets.

[Terry Duguid, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change]

Madam Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for his passion and commitment to conservation.

The world is facing an unprecedented biodiversity crisis. Canadians have a deep connection with nature and understand that protecting the environment is all about protecting our shared future. The Government of Canada is committed to continue leading efforts and strengthening partnerships to halt biodiversity loss and build a better, more prosperous and greener future for everyone. That is why Canada committed to conserve 25% of our lands and waters by 2025 and 30% of each by 2030, working to halt and reverse biodiversity loss by 2030 in Canada, achieve a full recovery for nature by 2050 and championing this goal internationally.

This is an ambitious goal. Currently, Canada has conserved just over 13% of our lands and inland waters. Important investments are setting the stage to meet the 25% by 2025 domestic target and support efforts to achieve 30% protection by 2030. In Canada, working with partners is essential as land available for conservation and protection are under diverse jurisdictions.

As the national government in a federation, we have always said that we would do things in a collaborative manner. Through a number of governance bodies, we have jointly developed pan-Canadian guidance that is supported by all jurisdictions. We are working with a number of jurisdictions to advance bilateral nature agreements. These are another way to work with our provincial and territorial partners on shared objectives and outcomes. While our progress on the 30% target may not be as fast as we would like, we are proud of the deliberate and collaborative approach that has brought us to this stage.

Canada also took a strong international leadership role on the development of an ambitious new global biodiversity framework that was finalized at the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity's 15th Conference of the Parties in Montreal in December. It was a proud moment for our country. The global biodiversity framework will provide a collective road map toward halting and reversing biodiversity loss and the degradation of nature and ecosystems around the world.

To the hon. member's point, we understand that some non-governmental organizations have proposed a national biodiversity act to create an accountability law similar to the Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act. We will work with our conservation partners and others to implement this new global biodiversity framework and explore all potential tools that will help us to meet our nature objectives, including potential new legislative tools.

Protecting biodiversity must also be done hand in hand with indigenous peoples. Recognizing the importance of reconciliation and the role played by indigenous leaders and partners in conservation, we have an opportunity to work collaboratively to further support indigenous-led conservation efforts.

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Madam Speaker, I have outlined what we need to do to meet the challenge of biodiversity loss in Canada. We do need legislation that has a process to set meaningful targets, a real plan on how we are going to meet those targets and public, transparent accountability measures to make sure we succeed.

The plans for biodiversity protection must include a variety of habitat management models that include measures to protect wide-ranging species, such as caribou, as well as specific sites for other vulnerable species. This will all involve partnerships with indigenous peoples, non-government organizations and, of course, the provinces that control most of the public lands in Canada, but we must succeed. The health of the environment we live in, the environments that provide us with clean air, clean water and rich soils to grow our crops rely ultimately on a rich array of species.

Canada said the right things in Montreal when the world was watching and now we must turn those words into bold action to maintain a livable world for future generations.

[Terry Duguid, Liberal, Winnipeg South, MB]

Madam Speaker, we do have a plan. We are working with that plan. Since 2015, we have been getting results. Canada has increased its conserved terrestrial areas by more than 2%, an area roughly the size of Italy. Canada has conserved or protected just over 13% of our lands and inland waters.

On the marine side, Canada has conserved 14% of our marine and coastal areas, up from less than 1% in 2015. The 2022 update to the Canadian Protected and Conserved Areas Database will be available in March 2023.

We need to do this, as the hon. member said, in partnership with indigenous peoples and communities. Achieving our biodiversity goals will require a whole-of-government approach and a whole society approach.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

The motion that the House do now adjourn is deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly the House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 10 a.m. pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 6:50 p.m.)