House of Commons Hansard #373 of the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was going.

Topics

Public Safety and National SecurityCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

12:45 p.m.

Bloc

Xavier Barsalou-Duval Bloc Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate my colleague on his speech that was full of passion and rhetoric. However, I would like to bring him back to the topic at hand.

My colleague is upset about the fact that we are just now debating the committee report from two years ago, but I am not sure whether he listened to the speech by my colleague from Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia.

In her speech, my colleague more or less said that, despite the fact that the report was adopted unanimously by all the parties and therefore by the government, most of the recommendations it contains have not yet been implemented.

Obviously, organizations such as PolyRemembers are getting anxious and wondering how this government, which claims to be there to protect women, is not doing what it should.

Public Safety and National SecurityCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

12:45 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Mr. Speaker, what is most telling about the fact that the first question came from the Bloc is that no Conservative member in the House chose to stand up to ask me a question on what I was talking about.

To answer the member's question, reports come to the House all the time, as he knows. Some reports get a lot of their details from committee embraced and taken on by the government through forms of legislation and other policy. Some take more time and some take less, but that is the whole point of a report coming from committee. It comes from committee to be tabled for the government's consideration. That is the whole point of committee work.

Like the member said, some of the recommendations have been taken up. Some of the other ones he wants to continue to push forward. I would encourage him to do so at committee. The committee can say that it has been two and a half years and it is time to study this again to provide an updated report.

Public Safety and National SecurityCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

12:45 p.m.

Conservative

Greg McLean Conservative Calgary Centre, AB

Mr. Speaker, I will rise to address my colleague across the way when he says nobody asked what he was talking about. Let me ask, what the heck are you talking about? This is a fantasy you spew in the House of Commons that there is all kinds of conspiracy behind the scenes in what Conservatives are trying to do.

We are trying to get things done in the House. We would like you to stop impeding government so we can have documents to get things done and we can make the House of Commons work for Canadians. Now, you can dream up all kinds of excuses about why we are doing that, but we are trying to help you govern here in the proper way a democracy can happen.

Will you please tell us what the heck you are talking about in your dreamscape?

Public Safety and National SecurityCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

12:45 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker Chris d'Entremont

I would ask the hon. member for Calgary Centre if he was talking directly to the Chair or talking directly to the hon. member. Members must go through the Chair when asking questions of individuals in the chamber.

The hon. deputy House leader has the floor.

Public Safety and National SecurityCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

12:45 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Mr. Speaker, I am not dreaming up conspiracy theories. I am just laying out the facts, which are very clear. The Conservatives do not want anything to happen in terms of a study on foreign interference at the public safety committee. They are stopping that from happening. The Leader of the Opposition refuses to get his security clearance. That is a second fact. Another fact is it has been widely reported that foreign actors interfered in the Conservative leadership.

That is all factual information. I leave it up to the public to draw their own conclusions, but I imagine we are all going to end up at the same place. This member says, “We are trying to help the government govern,” but anybody who has been watching this for any longer than 30 seconds over the last two months will know that is completely untrue.

Public Safety and National SecurityCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

12:50 p.m.

NDP

Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON

Mr. Speaker, it is an interesting point the member raises, and I think it is a valid one, about the shenanigans that happen from time to time at committee by the Conservatives using this place to try to direct our committees on these endless witch hunts. However, I am curious, because we did rise for a unanimous consent motion to have a special committee on India, and it was the member for Winnipeg Centre who opposed when we thought we had unanimous consent of the House.

Why did they do that when we could have been in a special committee dealing with this, given the seriousness of the allegations that came out from the RCMP on October 21?

Public Safety and National SecurityCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

12:50 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Mr. Speaker, my guess would be, why do we need a special committee when we already have multiple committees that could look at this? For example, the public safety committee is trying to look at this. Nobody from this side is trying to avoid looking at the issue. Conservatives are literally blocking the ability to do that. The foreign affairs committee could also look at it. I imagine we would get the same response.

To answer the member's question about the unanimous consent motion more specifically, it has been a long time. Let us bring back the unanimous consent motion and try to table it again. Perhaps he will have more success this time.

Public Safety and National SecurityCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

12:50 p.m.

Conservative

Pierre Paul-Hus Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC

Mr. Speaker, I am here today to talk about the report “A Path Forward: Reducing Gun and Gang Violence in Canada”, which was prepared by the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security.

This report was tabled in April 2022. It has been two and a half years, but it has yet to be adopted. We are here today to debate it. The Conservative Party tabled an amendment to allow this report to be reopened. It should be noted that this study was done—

Public Safety and National SecurityCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

12:50 p.m.

NDP

Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON

Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, I said Winnipeg Centre when clearly I meant Winnipeg North, and I would not want that to reflect poorly on the Hansard. I withdraw “Winnipeg Centre” and I replace it with “Winnipeg North”.

Public Safety and National SecurityCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

12:50 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Mr. Speaker, I have a point of order. Just as a reminder to the member, I would invite him to introduce the motion again.

Public Safety and National SecurityCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

12:50 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker Chris d'Entremont

The hon. member for Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles.

Public Safety and National SecurityCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

November 21st, 2024 / 12:50 p.m.

Conservative

Pierre Paul-Hus Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC

Mr. Speaker, I rise here today to speak to the report of the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security entitled “A Path Forward: Reducing Gun and Gang Violence in Canada”.

This report was completed and tabled in April 2022, two and a half years ago. Now we want to debate and vote on this report. However, the report is no longer valid, given that a lot of information about public safety has changed in the past two and a half years. When we look at what was proposed in the report, it is important to first note that the report was not unanimous and that the three opposition parties all presented supplementary reports. The initial report, although lengthy, was not good enough for all the parties.

That is why we brought forward an amendment today calling for this study to be reopened in order to complete it and obtain much more up-to-date information on the public safety situation and the criminal use of firearms in Canada. We also need information on the rise of street gangs in cities across Canada.

We need to talk about this. We have known this for a long time, but, for the past nine years, it has always been clear to us that the Liberals and public safety are not synonymous. Measures were taken. Each time, the government said it was making investments, but the fact is, the right hand was spending money while the left was amending the Criminal Code to reduce the law's impact on criminals.

Consider Bill C‑5, which was brought into force, and Bill C‑75. Among other things, Bill C‑75 allows criminals to be arrested and released multiple times in the same day. Bill C‑5 allows criminals to serve jail time at home watching Netflix instead of in a penitentiary, where they belong. The public figured that out pretty quickly when these bills came into force. Most police services and victim protection groups have said it makes no sense. The report was tabled two and a half years ago, and nothing has been done about it since. Meanwhile, the government has enacted bills that have made the public safety situation in this country even worse.

The report contains a number of recommendations. One of them calls on the government to acknowledge the fact that a public safety problem exists. This is unbelievable. The idea that the committee would have to tell the government to wake up because we have a problem is disturbing enough.

On top of that, a huge number of witnesses who appeared before the committee clearly told us that the gun crime problem was not caused by registered gun owners. Representatives of the Toronto Police Association, the Toronto Police Service and police associations in Quebec and across the country told us the same thing. We have been saying this for a long time, and the witnesses confirmed it.

Unfortunately, the main report neglected to take the police recommendations into account. The Conservative Party had to draft a supplementary report to highlight the various recommendations made by these organizations, which clearly explain that street gangs and criminals are using trafficked guns arriving mainly from the United States. They say that over 80% of crimes involve guns that are not registered anywhere and were purchased illegally. That is the real problem. That is the main problem right there.

Rather than tackling the main problem, the recommendations call for guns to be taken away from all Canadians who have firearms licenses. This led to the infamous 2020 ban, which sought to take away all firearms. The Liberals and the Bloc Québécois were scaring Canadians by saying that law-abiding gun owners were criminals. Meanwhile, real crimes are being committed in the dark, behind the scenes. That is the problem.

I have a firearms licence myself, and I own guns. I am a law-abiding citizen and my guns are registered. I have been vetted. I am a member of a gun club. I do what I have to do. All gun owners are law-abiding citizens. However, the thugs on the streets of Montreal who drive around with guns hidden in their cars did not buy their guns at a firearms retailer. They bought them on the black market. They commit their crimes with these weapons, and they do not care.

It is important to understand that it is going to cost at least $3 billion to buy back the firearms that law-abiding citizens, who are doing nothing wrong, have at home. We could take that money and invest it in control mechanisms for the police, for the border, so that we can work with Akwesasne to check what is illegally entering the country. Unfortunately, that is an area where there is a lot of gun trafficking. The reserve abuts the U.S. and Canada in both Ontario and Quebec. We need to focus our efforts on gun control. That is where we need to put our energy and money. We should not be buying back firearms from law-abiding citizens, hunters and sport shooters who have done nothing wrong.

We have been talking about this for years. We are not even close to reaching an agreement. I do not know why my Liberal, Bloc Québécois and NDP colleagues cannot understand this logic. Instead of saying that this is what we should do, they are trying to scare people. We need to crack down on criminals. That is where we need to focus our efforts and investments. That is the situation with gun control.

Arms trafficking is another issue. We are talking about crime on the streets, especially the rise in gang crime. Even the Hells Angels are afraid of these criminals. They are incredibly violent and dangerous. Every police force and victims' group will say that this is the biggest problem. I introduced Bill C‑325, which was unfortunately blocked by the Liberals and the NDP. Its aim was to undo the legislation that came out of Bill C‑5. That law is completely stupid. When criminals on the streets saw it, they rubbed their hands together with glee and thanked the Prime Minister because now they can go about committing crime without the least bit of concern. At worst, they will serve a prison sentence at home. They will take a little break, drink a beer, watch Netflix, and then go back out on the street. They will not be out of commission for long. That is what is happening; we predicted it.

We said during debate that this was what was going to happen, as in the case of Bill C-75, and it is happening. It is happening now. None of the studies that were done prior to Bill C-5 and Bill C‑75 mention it. That is why we need to reopen the committee's study. We need to confirm what has been happening for the past two and a half years, since these two laws were passed and came into force. Crime has skyrocketed. If we do not, the current report might as well just sit on a shelf. It is really not up to date. Things have changed, and that is because the government has implemented completely stupid measures.

When it comes to firearms, Conservatives think that law-abiding citizens, sport shooters and hunters who have a licence and who are monitored should be left alone. First, Canada's laws are very strict. It is very complicated to own a gun. People who do own guns obey the law. Measures already exist. They are already in place. Why is the government attacking these people?

Second, we have to go back to the criminal side of things, strengthen the criminal laws, undo the laws that came out of Bill C-75 and Bill C-5, restore order in the Criminal Code to allow judges and police officers to do their work and apply justice that is reasonable and makes the streets safer. It is simple, really. The rest is political gobbledygook that I do not understand.

I was the Conservative Party public safety critic for three years. I heard people, Liberal and NDP colleagues, say all sorts of things. I wondered what planet they were living on. We are not dealing with the same reality. We might say that there are virtual realities in Canada. We do not all have two feet on the ground.

Let us come back to the report and the recommendations. The Conservatives' supplementary opinion was essentially what I am saying today. That is what we want. That is what police services want. The victims' groups I met with, who supported my Bill C‑325, do not understand what the government, backed by the other parties, has done. They want us to restore order to this country.

It is simple. Change the law. Restore order. Instead of buying back firearms from law-abiding citizens, put money into border control to help police services do their job. That will solve the vast majority of the problems in this country.

Public Safety and National SecurityCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

1 p.m.

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, the whole issue today is about how the Conservative Party, quite frankly, is using the House's authority to prevent the public safety committee from dealing with foreign interference, in regard to both India and Russia. I find that very shameful.

At the end of the day, the leader of the Conservative Party is hiding something. There is something he is not telling Canadians. I would like to see individuals like Patrick Brown appear before the public security committee. I know one of my colleagues has brought forward the suggestion that we have a summons issued for him.

Is this one of the reasons the Conservative Party today refuses to allow that standing committee to do the work necessary on foreign interference? Why are the Conservatives interfering, in the interest of their leader, to prevent Canadians from knowing what the Conservative Party is hiding?

What in the leader of the Conservative Party's background is causing him not to be able to get the security clearance?

What is the Conservative Party so afraid of? Is it that the leadership was influenced, that its own leader was involved in foreign interference?

Public Safety and National SecurityCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

1 p.m.

Conservative

Pierre Paul-Hus Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC

Mr. Speaker, for the past few weeks, the Liberals have been engaging in outright harassment on a matter of national security. It would be very easy for them to fix the problem by disclosing the names of those involved in foreign interference. We would know where we stand.

However, the Liberals would rather use this issue to make baseless accusations against the Conservative leader, when they are the ones at fault. They are making things up because they do not want to talk about the real problems. The real problems are the ones I was just talking about a few minutes ago. Street crime is up 90% in this country since 2015. Guns cross the border very easily because there is no real control; the Liberals would rather spend money on buying back firearms from law-abiding owners. Millions of dollars have already been spent on this, and soon it will be billions.

The Liberals are just trying to draw attention away from the real problem, which is their gross incompetence over the past nine years.

Public Safety and National SecurityCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

1 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker Chris d'Entremont

It is my duty to interrupt the proceedings and put forthwith the question necessary to dispose of the motion now before the House.

The question is on the amendment to the amendment.

If a member participating in person wishes that the subamendment be carried or carried on division, or if a member of a recognized party participating in person wishes to request a recorded division, I would invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.

Public Safety and National SecurityCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

1:05 p.m.

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Mr. Speaker, I request a recorded division.

Public Safety and National SecurityCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

1:05 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker Chris d'Entremont

Pursuant to Standing Order 45, the recorded division stands deferred until later this day at the expiry of the time provided for Oral Questions.

Fossil FuelsPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

1:05 p.m.

NDP

Laurel Collins NDP Victoria, BC

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to present four petitions.

The first petition is on air pollution. The petitioners recognize that fossil fuel consumption is a public health issue, causing 34,000 premature deaths annually in Canada. They highlight that Canada restricts advertising for tobacco, gambling, alcohol and pharmaceuticals to protect public health. Fossil fuel advertising misleads the public about the health harms of climate change, delaying climate action and the transition to cleaner energy.

To protect public health, the petitioners are calling on the Government of Canada to ban fossil fuel advertising, sponsorship and promotion.

Agriculture and Agri-FoodPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

1:05 p.m.

NDP

Laurel Collins NDP Victoria, BC

Mr. Speaker, the second petition is signed by nearly 5,000 petitioners.

The petitioners are calling on the Government of Canada to look at the issue of emissions from the agricultural sector in Canada; these emissions are second only to those of oil and gas. The petitioners note that reducing animal food consumption can help meet our climate targets.

The petitioners are calling on the Government of Canada to educate Canadians on plant-based diets, source more plant-based foods in federal programs and support sustainable farming.

Human RightsPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

1:05 p.m.

NDP

Laurel Collins NDP Victoria, BC

Mr. Speaker, the third petition is on international human rights.

The petitioners note that Canadians are calling on the government because Canadian companies are contributing to global human rights abuses and environmental harms. Protesters, particularly indigenous peoples and marginalized groups, face violence overseas because of the actions of Canadian companies and those companies involved in Canadian supply chains. Canada encourages but does not require companies to prevent these harms. The petitioners are calling on the House of Commons to mandate companies to prevent harm in their global operations, assess their impact, provide remedies and face consequences for negligence. Affected individuals should be allowed to seek justice in Canadian courts.

Parental AlienationPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

1:10 p.m.

NDP

Laurel Collins NDP Victoria, BC

Mr. Speaker, the final petition is on parental alienation.

Petitioners describe how parental alienation is a discredited theory used in family courts to undermine survivors of family violence and undermine children's wishes. It has disproportionate impacts on the safety of women and children. The petitioners note that over 250 feminist and women's organizations, along with the United Nations, are urging the government to legislate protections against parental alienation claims in family courts. This would provide supports for survivors of gender-based violence. They are calling on the Minister of Justice and Attorney General to amend the Divorce Act to protect against these claims in parental disputes.

Democratic InstitutionsPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

1:10 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Mr. Speaker, I have a petition signed by many Canadians. They are bringing to the attention of the House the fact that the RCMP has reported that the Government of India has interfered in Canada's elections. It has also murdered, threatened and extorted Canadians on Canadian soil. The petitioners find it deeply troubling that the Leader of the Opposition continues to decline to get a security clearance, and they feel as though he is not doing his job in terms of protecting his members and Canadians. Therefore, the signatories of this petition are calling on the leader of the Conservative Party to get his security clearance and take action to help stop foreign governments from interfering in Canada and targeting Canadians.

Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

1:10 p.m.

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, I ask that all questions be allowed to stand at this time, please.

Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

1:10 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker Chris d'Entremont

Is that agreed?

Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

1:10 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.