House of Commons Hansard #386 of the 44th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was conservatives.
This summary is computer-generated. Usually it’s accurate, but every now and then it’ll contain inaccuracies or total fabrications.
Oral Questions—Speaker's Ruling The Speaker rules that questions in Question Period must relate to government administrative responsibility. Question Period's purpose is government accountability, not attacking opposition parties who lack the same response opportunity. The Speaker will enforce this. 900 words.
Public Accounts Members debate a Public Accounts report on pandemic border measures, focusing on current border security. Conservatives raise concerns about lax controls, increased fentanyl trafficking, illegal crossings, and potential U.S. tariffs, criticizing the government's record. Liberals defend their border investments, accusing Conservatives of amplifying misinformation and past cuts. NDP members also criticize Conservative border cuts and accuse them of undermining Canada by echoing U.S. rhetoric. Bloc members criticize federal border management and call for CBSA administrative supervision. 25200 words, 3 hours.
Industry and Technology NDP moves to split Bill C-27 into privacy/tribunal and AI components. They argue the bill is poorly drafted and compromises privacy, seeking to pass the privacy component and protect the Privacy Commissioner. Liberals argue for a holistic approach, are open to amendments, and accuse parties of obstruction. 6200 words, 45 minutes.
Access to Parliamentary Precinct NDP MP Leah Gazan responds to a Conservative MP's question of privilege, denying involvement in an event that allegedly breached privilege and defending her support for "Jews Against Genocide" demonstrators against accusations. 1000 words, 10 minutes.
Opposition Motion—Repeal of Bill C-5 Members debate a Conservative motion claiming Liberal drug policies and Bill C-5 contribute to 47,000 deaths. Conservatives propose reversing C-5, increasing sentences, and enhancing border security. Liberals, Bloc, and NDP counter that C-5 addressed unconstitutional mandatory minimums and simple possession, argue Conservatives cut border security, and advocate for harm reduction and treatment. 12900 words, 2 hours.
Supplementary Estimates (B), 2024-25 First reading of Bill C-79. The bill grants sums of money for federal public administration for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2025. It passes all readings with support from Liberals, Bloc, NDP, and Green parties; Conservatives and one Independent vote against. 400 words, 10 minutes.
Ruby Sahota Liberal Brampton North, ON
Mr. Speaker, I believe that if you seek it, you will find agreement to apply the results from the previous vote to this vote, with Liberal members voting in favour.
Chris Warkentin Conservative Grande Prairie—Mackenzie, AB
Mr. Speaker, Conservatives agree to apply the vote, with Conservatives voting against.
Kristina Michaud Bloc Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Bloc Québécois agrees to apply the result of the previous vote to this vote and will vote in favour of the motion.
Heather McPherson NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
Mr. Speaker, the New Democrats agree to apply the vote and will be voting yes.
Mike Morrice Green Kitchener Centre, ON
Mr. Speaker, the Green Party agrees to apply the result of the previous vote to this vote and will vote in favour of the motion.
Kevin Vuong Independent Spadina—Fort York, ON
Mr. Speaker, I agree to apply the result of the previous vote, voting nay.
Ruby Sahota Liberal Brampton North, ON
Mr. Speaker, I believe that if you seek it you will find agreement among the parties to apply the result of the previous vote to this vote, with Liberal members voting in favour.
Chris Warkentin Conservative Grande Prairie—Mackenzie, AB
Mr. Speaker, the official opposition agrees to apply the vote, with Conservatives voting against.
Kristina Michaud Bloc Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Bloc Québécois agrees to apply the result of the previous vote to this vote and will vote in favour of the motion.
Heather McPherson NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
Mr. Speaker, the NDP agrees to apply the result of the previous vote to this vote and will vote in favour of the motion.
Mike Morrice Green Kitchener Centre, ON
Mr. Speaker, the Greens agree to apply the vote and will be voting in favour.
Kevin Vuong Independent Spadina—Fort York, ON
Mr. Speaker, I agree to apply the result of the previous vote, voting nay.
Message from the SenateGovernment Orders
The Speaker Greg Fergus
I have the honour to inform the House that a message has been received from the Senate informing this House that the Senate has passed the following bill, to which the concurrence of the House is desired: Bill S-230, an act to amend the Corrections and Conditional Release Act.
Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB
Mr. Speaker, I suspect that, if you were to canvass the House, you would find unanimous consent to see the clock at 7:07 p.m.
A motion to adjourn the House under Standing Order 38 deemed to have been moved.
Kevin Vuong Independent Spadina—Fort York, ON
Mr. Speaker, on November 27, the Prime Minister avoided my question and tried to deflect the failures of his immigration minister to protect Canadians and secure our borders.
The Prime Minister should worry less about the opposition leader and concentrate more on his ongoing refusal to name the individuals implicated in working on behalf of Chinese foreign interests and bring them to justice. What is motivating the Prime Minister to not provide those names? Is he afraid that on that list are members of his own party or cabinet, people who have benefited from Chinese foreign interference? Treason is a serious offence, as is being bought off by foreign influencers in being in receipt of electoral and financial benefits, as reported by NSICOP. These are all very serious matters that require full investigation by the appropriate authorities.
The Prime Minister does not have the legal authority to determine if traitors get shielded from our laws. The Prime Minister knows the damage and the danger caused by his weak and ineffectual immigration minister and the precarious position his failures are posing to the Canadian economy in light of the 25% tariff threat issued by President-elect Trump. How is it possible that the Prime Minister would shelter people and permit a porous border, where terrorists and those out to betray our democracy and our country are given free entry passes? Are we now to see another influx of extremists like we have seen with the IRGC, but this time from potential extremists exiting Syria?
At least 14 countries have already frozen Syrian asylum applications, four of which, by the way, are fellow G7 members. What about Canada? Is the immigration minister going to let even more extremists waltz into Canada under the pretext of being bona fide refugees, eager to exploit our compassion as Canadians and our refugee program as a cover to avoid detection or persecution? What kind of immigration and refugee system do we have under the government? It seems more interested in letting in terrorists rather than acting to defend our borders and protect Canadians.
The Prime Minister must come clean and explain why he is so reluctant to bring those names forward for investigation and prosecution. This entire mess cannot be the product of some misguided personal or twisted interpretation by the Prime Minister of some form of executive privilege. It is the Prime Minister's duty to protect Canadians, our democracy and our economy. While he is at it, he must find a new immigration minister who is actually capable of doing the job.
It is not a coincidence that the Prime Minister did not bring the immigration minister with him to Mar-a-Lago, despite one of the core issues being the fact that there were 350 people on the U.S. terror watch-list stopped from crossing into the United States from Canada. First and foremost, how did these people enter Canada in the first place? For the same period, 52 people were stopped on the U.S.-Mexico border. That is nearly one-seventh of the terror suspects stopped at the Canada-U.S. border. Before the parliamentary secretary accuses me of talking down our country, I am focusing on the safety of Canadians, the dangers of the government and the worst immigration minister in our nation's 157-year history.
My question to the parliamentary secretary is simple. If someone who worked for him messed up this badly, putting his team, his staff and his customers at risk, would he not fire them?
Paul Chiang LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Immigration
Mr. Speaker, the Government of Canada takes the security of our borders and the integrity of our immigration system very seriously. We have processes and measures in place to safeguard Canadians, while also ensuring that those who seek to come here are treated with dignity and respect.
As part of our risk mitigation process, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada, in collaboration with the Canada Border Services Agency, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, conducts comprehensive security screening to identify those who might pose a threat to Canadians. Everyone coming to our country must meet entry and admissibility requirements. Before entering Canada, everyone is screened to ensure individuals do not pose a threat to the health, safety or security of Canadians.
This pre-screening is conducted through visa or electronic travel authorization applications. It involves verifying identity and assessing for potential risk; it can also involve the use of biographic and biometric information. We check applicants' fingerprints against a wide range of databases, including RCMP and international partner holdings, to identify potential security risks. These thorough checks help maintain the integrity of our immigration system and keep our country safe, while facilitating the safe travel of those who do not pose a risk.
Applicants flagged as potential threats are referred to, and undergo further screening by, the CBSA and CSIS. Immigration officers evaluate admissibility under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, addressing criminality, security risks and misrepresentation. CBSA officers conduct another layer of screening upon applicants' entry into Canada. People who misrepresent themselves or use fraudulent documents, as well as those flagged in the system, can be denied entry.
All adults who claim asylum in Canada are subject to comprehensive security screening by CBSA and CSIS. Once people are admitted to Canada, security partners and law enforcement work together to manage threats within our borders. To uphold the integrity of our immigration system, we collaborate with international partners to establish agreements that enhance our shared commitment to secure and effective processes. These agreements allow for the secure exchange of immigration data and personal information of applicants to support informed decision-making and strengthen the integrity and efficiency of our immigration system.
These partners are essential in helping to make swift, reliable decisions about admissibility; enhancing security; and promoting legitimate travels. The Government of Canada is committed to continuing to protect our borders and communities and to uphold a fair and well-managed immigration system. We will keep working with our partners to strengthen our system and keep our country safe.
Kevin Vuong Independent Spadina—Fort York, ON
Mr. Speaker, given the complete and utter failure of the government and the immigration minister, honestly, I do not blame the parliamentary secretary for reading his script word for word. Frankly, I do not blame him for trying to run out the clock with his government-issued talking points either.
The parliamentary secretary talked about safeguards. Let us look at how those safeguards are performing. Earlier this summer, a father-son duo was arrested in Toronto before being able to execute an advanced-stage terror plot, an attack in Toronto, Canada. That father was in an ISIS terror video, in which he was pictured dismembering the body of a victim that they had murdered, hacking at them with a sword. Therefore, the safeguards are not working.
What is the plan to keep Canadians safe, defend the integrity of our immigration system and secure our borders?
