Debates of June 4th, 2024

Report Stage

[Joyce Murray, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I really appreciate the question because it gives me an opportunity to confirm my appreciation for all the work the member does in the chamber and to state our government's absolute commitment to reconciliation. We have shown that through laws reflecting UNDRIP and in how we operate as a government. As a society, we are still on the voyage to fully acknowledging and correcting historic injustices. That is what reconciliation is all about.

The fact that this was identified as a weakness in this bill and was corrected shows the very process that is under way in so many aspects of our society and our parliamentary affairs. I am happy that this was caught and improved, and we will continue to do our best to do better.

[Alistair MacGregor, NDP, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it is nice to see my Conservative colleagues clapping for me. That is really quite thoughtful.

I am very pleased to be rising in the House today to speak to Bill C-20 at its report stage. I just want to note that when this Parliament started, the 44th Parliament, I was appointed as the critic for public safety. Of course, this was one of the first pieces of legislation that I got to deal with as the critic and that was handled by the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security.

I just want to remind the House and the people watching this debate, that this bill has been a long time coming, not only in this Parliament but also in previous Parliaments. Just to give a sense of the timeline involved, this bill was first introduced way back on May 19, 2022. It received its second reading on November 25, 2022. However, it was not until November 9, 2023, a full year later, that the public safety committee completed its study of the bill and reported it back to the House. Here we are, on June 4, trying to get through the report stage of this bill, Bill C-20.

That needs to be noted because this bill, of course, is the result of many different people talking about the shortcomings of both the RCMP and the CBSA, is not only their shortcomings, but also the lack of an effective oversight and accountability mechanism. That has nowhere been more true than with the indigenous people who live in this land called Canada.

I first want to note that the riding I represent, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, is served entirely by the RCMP. In my time as the member of Parliament for Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, which I have been fortunate to hold since 2015, I have developed a good working relationship with the RCMP, the North Cowichan/Duncan detachment and the West Shore. I know that the people who serve those detachments are doing it out of love for the communities, and I know they are going out and doing their best every single day. I know they are dealing with some very difficult circumstances.

Like many communities across Canada, my riding has not been untouched by the opioids crisis. We have a mental health crisis. I know that many of the RCMP officers are not only responding to those incidents as police, but also, often as the first responder, dealing with a mental health crisis or with someone who is close to an overdose. I do want to recognize the good work that they are doing.

I want to also recognize the good work of the people who staff the Canada Border Services Agency, who, right now, are involved in some very difficult negotiations with the Government of Canada regarding their hours of work and their pensions. Of course, these are the people who keep the borders of Canada safe. They do important work.

The public safety committee has been doing a big study on car thefts. The CBSA has an incredibly important role not only to examine the cargo coming in and going out of Canada, but also to screen the people coming here to make sure that everyone is a verifiable visitor and is here for the right reasons.

That being said, I do need to take note of something. My riding of Cowichan—Malahat—Langford is home to several indigenous communities. We really need to highlight that and need to underline it when we are talking about this bill, Bill C-20, because it is well known, in the history of this land called Canada, that indigenous people on this land have had a very troubled relationship with the RCMP. Just saying that sentence would, in fact, probably be a gross understatement. We have to keep that in mind.

I also want to recognize that, as a member of the NDP caucus, I am incredibly privileged to serve with three incredible and outstanding indigenous members: the member for Edmonton Griesbach, the member for Nunavut and the member for Winnipeg Centre. I want them to know that I rely on their counsel and their wisdom quite heavily. I also rely on the wisdom and the counsel of the indigenous people who live in my riding of Cowichan—Malahat—Langford. They not only inform me as a person, but also inform me in the work I do as their member of Parliament.

It is important that we underline those concerns because I think that forms a very important basis of why Bill C-20 exists and why the House of Commons is finally reaching a point where we are giving it consideration and hopefully sending it on its way to the Senate and soon to royal assent.

Of course, my riding has been no stranger to controversy. I have been its MP since 2015, and I would say that probably the biggest flashpoint between the RCMP and a number of protesters, many of them indigenous, happened in the summer of 2021 at Fairy Creek, which is one of the last untouched, old-growth reserves on Vancouver Island. People are quite rightly concerned with logging practices in the province of British Columbia and with the preservation of old growth, but there were some very serious concerns raised about the conduct of the RCMP during the protests at Fairy Creek. Given the reviews that happened after the fact, it makes a bill like Bill C-20 all that much more important. In fact, none other than the B.C. Supreme Court ruled that the RCMP's media exclusion zones and checkpoints at that time were unlawful, given that they unreasonably limited press freedoms and that the principal purpose of the injunction is to maintain public access to roads in the injunction area. Again, a lot of the conduct there was very questionable, and certainly for people who were on the receiving end, it was described as quite brutal.

However, this is now my third Parliament, and this has been an issue that has crossed all three of those Parliaments. I want to read from the report of the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security from the previous Parliament when it did its deep dive into systemic racism in policing. It reads:

Given the pervasive nature of systemic racism in policing in Canada, the House of Commons Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security...has concluded that a transformative national effort is required to ensure that all Indigenous, Black and other racialized people in Canada are not subject to the discrimination and injustice that is inherent in the system as it exists today....

The Committee was told that accountability, oversight and transparency are critical to restore trust with Indigenous and racialized communities subject to systemic racism. Witnesses also emphasized the need for the collection of disaggregated race-based data to provide Canadians with an accurate picture of the impact of police practices and policies on Indigenous and racialized people.

I gave a pretty thorough speech on this bill at second reading, and I do not want to repeat the points I made at that time. However, I do want to note the important work that the public safety committee did on the bill and particularly on the important NDP amendments that were passed by the committee. I will quickly read through a number of them. They are: to ensure that there is proper union representation; to increase transparency and accountability; to ensure a reconciliation process with indigenous peoples; to expand the PCRC's investigative power; to increase transparency, to allow complainants a longer period to come forward to make a complaint; to ban the use of non-disclosure agreements to silence victims, to avoid intimidation and to allow the PCRC to know why complaints are being withdrawn, and so on and so forth.

I want to emphasize that this bill is incredibly important. We have heard repeatedly that the existing complaints process is not working and that we need something that exists outside the confines of the RCMP Act. Finally, for the CBSA, the remaining law enforcement agency that is under federal jurisdiction, we need to bring those two important agencies under the jurisdiction of this new PCRC.

To conclude, we are happy to offer our support to Bill C-20. It is about time that we got this bill across the finish line for important transparency and accountability for the people of Canada. I hope the Senate treats this bill with the urgency that the people demand of it.

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

Mr. Speaker, the member raises a lot of good reasons as to why it is important that this legislation ultimately passes. I know he is very familiar with the rules and procedures, in terms of what actually takes place. There is a significant number of pieces of legislation, not to mention other government motions and so forth. It would have been nice to have been be able to see this passed, given that all members seem to be supporting this legislation, including the Conservatives, yet it has been difficult to get it passed, and without the support of the NDP on time allocation, this bill would not pass.

I wonder if the member could provide his thoughts in regard to why it was important that we bring in the time allocation in order to get the bill passed.

[Alistair MacGregor, NDP, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I am not going to let the Liberals off the hook there.

I do want to note that there was an incredible gap, not only between the second reading and when the public safety committee reported the bill back to the House, but also between that date and where we are today. Absolutely, the NDP agrees that it is an important bill. That is why we are happy to support time allocation, but again, the government has great power in this place in terms of how it schedules orders of the day, and we agree that there were some very important pieces of legislation that we wanted to see passed, but I do not think there is much of an excuse to the people who are directly affected by the proposed bill to see the delays that were put in existence by the government.

As such, I am not going to explain that away. I think the Liberals owe an explanation, not only to Black racialized Canadians, but also to the indigenous people who live in this place called Canada.

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague spoke at length about the whole issue of systemic discrimination. Before the commission was created, complaints were handled on a more individual basis, making it impossible to see the big picture. We can only hope that the new commission will be able to identify trends and make reports and recommendations to prevent systemic inappropriate behaviour from happening in the future.

Does my colleague believe that this will really have such a positive impact? Is there anything that could have been added to ensure that this big-picture vision actually leads to recommendations on needs and on corrective action when necessary?

[Alistair MacGregor, NDP, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

Madam Speaker, I agree. I think that this is a real opportunity to collect that macrodata because I ultimately think that all good government policy has to be informed by good, solid data. That is not to say that we are not unaware of the complaints that have existed with both the RCMP and the CBSA. I think those are both very well documented, but again, I think through the formation of this commission, through the proposed act of Parliament, we would have that formal legislative body that sits above both of those agencies and would have those formal legislative powers that we, in the House of Commons and in the Senate, have given it to actually go further than what we already know by anecdotes and media reports, and the existing complaint mechanism.

I would agree with that member. I think there is a real opportunity. I think the legislation would allow us to collect that better data to inform better government policy going forward.

[Adam Chambers, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

Madam Speaker, I want to commend my fellow colleague for giving a speech in which he appropriately holds the government to account, and he did not mention the official opposition once, but he appropriately placed relevant criticism at the feet of the government for its delay in bringing the bill forward.

As such, I do not have much of a question, but I have more or less a comment to thank the hon. member for appropriately holding the government to account for its negligence in waiting so long to bring the bill forward.

[Alistair MacGregor, NDP, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for that comment. It goes to show the nimbleness and power of the NDP. On the one hand, we are able to force the Liberal government to bring in things such as dental care and pharmacare, but at the same time we can hold it to account for its shortcomings on legislation like this. I am glad my Conservative friend can finally see that and show it publicly here in the House.

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

Madam Speaker, it is a bittersweet moment for me to rise on this important legislation.

It is not a secret that in indigenous communities particularly there is a need for accountability when it comes to the dramatic actions of the RCMP and its direct negligence of its purpose to ensure peace and security for so many, which oftentimes fails indigenous people.

The most important piece to this legislation in the minds of many indigenous people is the aspect that would replace the existing Civilian Review and Complaints Commission, or the CRCC, for the RCMP and establish a new stand-alone and independent commission. This is an incredible testament to the immense work of indigenous people and advocates, including that of the missing and murdered indigenous women and girls inquiry, which had its five-year anniversary just yesterday. Its report was blunt in its assessment, stating, “The RCMP have not proven to Canada that they are capable of holding themselves to account”.

This opportunity has been a long time coming, and I am very honoured to rise to speak to this issue, but also to highlight the stories of survivors who have had to endure pain and suffering inflicted upon them by the RCMP. It is my hope that, through this legislation and the implementation of this independent review committee, we would see the systemic change that is so desperately required for the victims who have had the immense courage to come forward. Members can imagine being attacked by a police officer, then overcoming the immense difficulty of telling that story, to oftentimes be met with a recommendation that goes nowhere. The report is put on a shelf, gathers dust and more pain grows. When we see no action or accountability for those who do harm, it creates an injustice. That injustice, in turn, creates a massive failure not only of policy-makers, but also of society.

In a 2013, a Human Rights Watch report entitled, “Those Who Take Us Away”, examined 10 towns across the north of British Columbia and documented numerous reports of RCMP officers violently assaulting indigenous women and girls, or arresting them when they called for help. I ask members to imagine that for a moment: calling out for help and being met with an arrest. These reports included attacks by police dogs, strip searches by male RCMP members, violent punches and attacks, and the use of pepper spray and tasers, which eventually injured them during these arrests. I would remind members that these were people who were calling the RCMP for help. Particularly disturbing are the numerous accounts of rape and sexual assault by RCMP members. In response to an investigation into this, women reported that officers had told them “no one will believe you”.

It was not that long ago in Manitoba where we saw a terrible instance of a police officer by the name of Officer Theriault, who took an indigenous woman out of a cell to “pursue a personal relationship”. His supervisor, in turn, mentioned how wrong it was, but insisted that the officer could do “whatever the [eff]” he wanted with her. This is simply unacceptable.

The time for the RCMP to do what they want in an unfettered fashion is over. I am very honoured and pleased to know that my colleague from Cowichan—Malahat—Langford has done the work necessary to make what has been a very difficult journey for so many, particularly indigenous women, possible. I also thank members of all parties, the Bloc Québécois, the Conservative Party and, of course, the Liberals for what I hope to be unanimous support for this bill.

However, I want to mention how important it is to recognize one of the calls for justice brought forward by the national inquiry. Call for justice no. 9.1 is “to acknowledge that the historical and current relationship between Indigenous women, girls, and 2SLGBTQQIA people and the justice system has been largely defined by colonialism, racism, bias, discrimination, and fundamental cultural and societal differences.”

Canada is a young country. We are still reeling from the effects and the ongoing participation of colonization by institutions that were built to do just that. The RCMP was first founded as a paramilitary group in recognition of the paramilitary group created in Ireland to attack the Irish people. It was replicated here in North America as a way to clear the plains when Sir John A. Macdonald so infamously wanted to bind this country together with two bands of steel, albeit bloody ones.

The RCMP, formerly known as the North-West Mounted Police, was charged with the very difficult, but also sad, job to displace so many people, and they used the immense tools of genocide to do it. We know this from accounts of survivors, particularly a member of the Métis community, a famous elder known as Maria Campbell. It is very difficult for me to mention this story because she is quite a revered elder and someone many Métis people and many indigenous people across the Prairies look up to. She revealed just a few years ago that she was forced by her publisher to edit out her recounting of being raped by an RCMP officer at the age of 14. He had simply dragged her into the bedroom of her own house, where a few RCMP members had come to hassle the family about alleged poaching.

It is very clear: RCMP sexual abuse of indigenous women and girls is an open and well-known secret across indigenous communities, still today. Even a 2014 Public Safety Canada report acknowledged this problem, when one service organization reported that the police “either rape you or arrest you. The cause is racism and discrimination.”

These are the stories of indigenous women who have long stewarded our nation. They are proud women who carry our stories, our languages and our traditions for thousands of years in this place. To be met with such violence and indignity is a shame and one that must be rectified. Albeit, this bill would do a very small part, but a necessary part, in making that a reality.

In my home province of Alberta, just a few months ago, in the small community of St. Paul, where my niece goes to school, a 33-year-old constable with the RCMP detachment, stationed in the northeast community, was arrested and charged with child sexual exploitation offences. He was suspended with pay.

This is not justice. This is not the kind of Canada that so many labour for. This is not the kind of Canada that so many people do everything they possibly can for their children to be raised in a safe environment, knowing that these atrocities continue and it could be them next. It scares me.

I should mention that it is not every day that this chamber is unanimous in support for doing what is right, but I am so pleased to know that today it is. I am proud to know that New Democrats will be voting in favour of this bill to bring in a much-needed level of civilian accountability and to bring justice to the many victims who deserve it.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Madam Speaker, I listened to my hon. friend's speech and he recounted some truly horrifying instances of abusive action by police officers against individuals, in particular individuals from marginalized communities. I want to affirm the importance of noting and reflecting on those instances of abuse.

I would also contend that I think it is important to include, as part of this conversation, that the vast majority of police officers go to work every day with good intentions to protect our communities. Indeed, the role of police officers is important in protecting all of us, particularly in protecting marginalized communities that would otherwise be at greater risk of violence. Further, I would say that efforts to defund the police undermine the role of police in our society and have made people less safe and have made marginalized communities, in particular, less safe.

Does the member agree with me that, in confronting these instances of abuse, we also need to affirm the work that the vast majority of officers are doing, which is working hard to keep all of us safe?

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

Madam Speaker, systemic racism is a dangerous, evil and illicit creature. It is one that compels those of any institution, including this institution, which can have people of good nature, good will and good spirit, and I know many members here have those qualities, but the institution can still do harm.

We witness that every single day. The RCMP is an institution, one that has structures and that is very different than being a person. It lacks spirit or quality of judgment. It has no morality, and it can force or compel those persons in it to create bad actions or to allow others to not be held accountable for their bad actions.

There are many good members of the RCMP. There are many good members of our public safety community that do good work every single day. However, the system they operate in is one that does not hold true allegiance to the principles that they may have. It is important that we recognize that difference.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague and acknowledge his passionate advocacy for indigenous issues. This issue has been raised in many studies by the Standing Committee on the Status of Women. It came up often during a study on the impact of resource development on indigenous women and during the red dress alert study.

In short, we see the matter of trust in authorities, the CBSA and the RCMP crop up in connection with various issues surrounding the safety of indigenous women and girls. It also emerges in relation to the issue of human trafficking of women and girls, something that disproportionately affects indigenous women and girls. We hear it all the time. How can we restore this relationship of trust, and how can this bill contribute to that end, or not?

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

Madam Speaker, it is true that Canada has undertaken an illicit program to dehumanize indigenous people. When one dehumanizes a population, it quickly becomes relevant and real that the population then suffers qualities of not being human, such as lack of clean water, lack of housing, lack of infrastructure and, ultimately, eventually, outright attacks on and negligence of the people themselves, in this case women.

We see across the globe that, in conflicts, women often face the brunt, the full force, of a violent regime that seeks to take away their individual autonomy, their individual rights and their humanity. When we remove humanity and our quality of being human, and we no longer see them as such, it becomes okay to harm them. It becomes okay to not hold those perpetrators accountable, and then it becomes normalized.

What we are seeing in Canada, particularly for indigenous women, is a crisis that deserves true accountability and deserves true work to see justice done.

[Brad Redekopp, Conservative, Saskatoon West, SK]

Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise tonight to speak to Bill C-20, which is an act that would establish the public complaints and review commission. It would essentially replace the existing Civilian Review and Complaints Commission for the RCMP by creating an external body and then combining it with the Canada Border Services Agency, which at the moment does not have an independent review system at all. The bill would create a new review commission for both of those organizations. It would have certain rules, tools and procedures to deal with the issues that would typically come up in a review body.

There are many different things that can come up. For example, just a few years ago in Saskatchewan, there was a terrible, tragic incident on the James Smith Cree Nation, where Myles Sanderson murdered 11 people on that reserve just north of Saskatoon. A coroner's inquest was held, which, in the future, could be done by a commission like the one we are talking about tonight. In this case, it was done by a provincial coroner's inquest. The inquest was completed in January of this year, and I want to highlight a couple of the things it found.

For example, one of the findings was that the RCMP gives patrol officers access to the most current photos of people. In addition, the enforcement and suppression team provides a list of its 60 most-wanted targets to all Saskatchewan RCMP detachments. When a most-wanted person is affiliated with or is a member of a first nation, RCMP detachment commanders work with the first nation's leadership to advise them of the individual's wanted status. That is an example of the kinds of findings and outcomes that could come from a commission like the PCRC. This is important and useful work that is done when there are complaints.

One of the interesting things in that particular incident was that the perpetrator, Myles Sanderson, had a history of violent offences and had been recently released on parole, despite the prediction by the parole board that he was likely to reoffend regardless of his racial background. This is really important because a lot of the work that commissions like the proposed one end up doing comes from a lot of the crime that is happening, obviously. The tragedy that occurred because of someone who was released on parole but maybe should not have been is an example of the soft-on-crime Liberal policies that we are seeing in Canada these days.

In 2021, the Liberal government introduced Bill C-5, which essentially removed mandatory minimum sentences from all Criminal Code offences committed with a firearm, such as robbery, assault, break and enter and extortion, as well as drug crimes such as trafficking, production and selling. In addition, Bill C-5 replaced prison sentences with conditional sentences, which is house arrest, for crimes like sexual assault, kidnapping, arson for fraudulent purposes, assault causing bodily harm with a weapon and assaulting a peace officer causing bodily harm or with a weapon. Those are just some examples of types of offences for which prison was removed and conditional sentencing, or house arrest, was granted.

In 2018, Bill C-75 was introduced by the Liberal government. Essentially, it made it much harder to put someone in jail and, conversely, much easier to get out. That is the essence of Bill C-75. The problem with that, and what leads to much of the crime we are seeing, is that it takes away the consequences in many cases for criminals, so they lose their fear of punishment. I will give an example. Imagine a youth who is struggling and is a little down on his luck. We could talk about how the government has made life so expensive with its reckless spending that has caused inflation and its carbon tax that has caused grocery prices to get more expensive, but that is another conversation.

Imagine this youth who is struggling to put food on the table. He may live with five or more other people in a two-bedroom apartment. Again, the policies of the government have caused housing to be so expensive. Now imagine that a gang member or somebody in a criminal organization asks him if he wants to make $500 by stealing a car, and tells him he will never go to go to jail and that the worst case scenario is that he will get arrested and be released back into the community, but that there are really no consequences.

What is that youth going to do? There is a good chance they are going to take the opportunity because they need the money. This is a problem in our culture today, that the consequences of their actions, the punishment for doing crimes, has been lessened so much that it becomes a viable option for a person like the one in the example I have given. What do we see in our country? We see that violent crime is up. Since 2015, when house arrest, which I mentioned in the examples I gave, was brought in, violent crimes are up 32% nationally.

Now, just to focus in on Saskatoon a little, in 2023 there were 12 murders in Saskatoon, 10 of which, by the way, were in the riding I represent, Saskatoon West, where I live and work. I have lived there for a period of time, and I have experienced many of the things that people experience on the west side of Saskatoon, including having my bike stolen, having to deal with people outside my home and things like that. These are things that we get used to and put up with.

As I said, in 2023 there were 12 murders in total in Saskatoon. So far this year, up to the end of May, there have been 10 murders, all of them in the riding I represent. I will look at a few other numbers on arrests, and this is quite concerning. In Saskatoon in the first five months of this year, there have been 830 assaults, versus 742 all last year. Sexual assaults so far this year are at 120, versus 84 all last year. Weapons charges are at 250, versus 256 all last year. Abductions so far are at 17, versus 14 all last year. Robberies are at 147, versus 131 all last year. Break and enters are at 500 so far, versus 600 all last year. Vehicles broken into or stolen so far this year are at 1,000, versus 1,200 last year.

We are not bad people on the west side of Saskatoon, far from it, and it is not a bad place to live. It is a beautiful area. There are lots of nice houses and lots of nice neighbourhoods. However, because of the soft-on-crime policies that we are seeing from the government—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Liberal, Alexandra Mendes]

Order. I must interrupt the hon. member because the hon. member for Saint-Jean is rising on a point of order.

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order regarding relevance. My colleague has been speaking for about eight minutes. I would be curious to know his position on Bill C-20 because, unless I am mistaken, he has not yet spoken about the bill itself. I believe he has two minutes left to do so.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Liberal, Alexandra Mendes]

I thank the hon. member.

I will remind the hon. member for Saskatoon West to bring it back to the subject at hand.

[Brad Redekopp, Conservative, Saskatoon West, SK]

Madam Speaker, what I am getting at with all of the crime that I am discussing and all of the soft-on-crime policies that the Liberal government has put in place is the fact of the workload that is on the RCMP and other police forces, which then leads to issues that would have to be investigated by the new commission that we are talking about.

Part of the answer is to fix the underlying problem in our laws so that we could reduce the crime we are seeing on our streets, make sure that appropriate punishments are being given to people who deserve to be punished, and ensure that appropriate treatment policies and other things are there. That is how we could make sure that the work of the new commission would be minimized.

I just want to mention the CBSA briefly. The CBSA does need oversight. We know it is having a very difficult time managing auto theft, and that is another huge problem. I have heard stories, for example, of people who are installing bollards in their driveway. For people who do not know what those are, people pull their car into the driveway and push a button, and steel columns come up to surround their vehicle so it cannot actually be removed, in any way, from their property. That is something we should not have to do in Canada, but people are doing it. It costs tens of thousands of dollars to install those in a driveway, yet people are being forced to do it.

As I wrap up, I want to take a moment to thank our RCMP officers, our local police officers and our CBSA officers. These individuals do tremendous work on behalf of Canadians. They keep our country safe. They keep our cities safe. They have a thankless job. They do not often get credit for what they do, so I just want to make sure to acknowledge that work and acknowledge that we in the House, and all Canadians as well, are thankful for the work that they do.

I am looking forward to the public review commission. I do support the idea. It is unfortunate that it has taken so long for it to get to this point and that it has been such a low priority for the government. I look forward to further discussion on it. Maybe this time, as the third time is the charm, it might actually get passed. We are going to make sure to stop the crime.

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

Madam Speaker, the only reason it would pass is that the government has been able to bring in time allocation, as the Conservatives made it very clear they do not want government legislation to pass. That is why, on this particular piece of legislation, the Conservatives moved a nonsense amendment to delete the short title, public complaints and review commission act. That is the reason we continue to debate it. There is a limit; we will debate it for five hours, and then it will come to a vote. If it were not for that, the legislation would not pass. That was more of a comment than a question.

[Brad Redekopp, Conservative, Saskatoon West, SK]

Madam Speaker, a comment related to that as well is that this started four years ago, and I believe the government decided to prorogue Parliament because it was trying to hide other issues. It was trying to stop people from looking at scandals that were coming up. The second time. I believe it was the election that was called unnecessarily to hide the WE scandal that was happening, to try to prevent it from being known. This is now the third time. I do not think one can accuse members of the opposition of being the problem here. It is clear the government is in control of the agenda. The government can pull things and make them happen, so—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Liberal, Alexandra Mendes]

Questions and comments, the hon. member for Cowichan—Malahat—Langford.

[Alistair MacGregor, NDP, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

Madam Speaker, there was a terribly erroneous link in my colleague's speech between the crime rates in Canada and what the bill is actually about. Let me be very clear that the legislation is here because of complaints of Black, racialized and indigenous people who had interactions with the police not because of what they did but because of who they are, what they look like and what their background is.

I would like to give my hon. colleague a chance to speak about that, not about the crime rate in Canada but about people's interactions with both the RCMP and the CBSA because of their indigenous background, because they were Black and because they were racialized, not because they did anything wrong but because they were profiled. That is why we are here. That is what we need to hear from the Conservatives about.

[Brad Redekopp, Conservative, Saskatoon West, SK]

Madam Speaker, I welcome the opportunity to have a review board that can look into allegations and complaints that are received publicly. It does not matter who they come from. It is important, though, that there be a mechanism in place, which is why the legislation is being supported, why it is moving forward and ultimately why it would do much good in our country.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Madam Speaker, there have been some suggestions about what my colleague's speech could have focused on, but normally the way speeches proceed in the House is that members choose particular themes that relate to what they are hearing from their constituents. Certainly, the rise in crime that has occurred under the NDP-Liberal government over the last nine years is a major topic of concern in constituencies across the country and is affecting many of the country's most vulnerable communities to a greater extent. People who do not have the means to protect themselves or secure their property in other ways are more vulnerable as a result of the rise in crime that has been driven by the failed policies of the NDP-Liberal government.

I wonder whether my colleague can share a bit more in particular about what he is hearing from people in his community about the negative impacts of the government's policies, the way that as soon as it took office there was a change in the trajectory of crime, with it dropping under the previous government and rising again under the now nine-year-old NDP-Liberal government.

[Brad Redekopp, Conservative, Saskatoon West, SK]

Madam Speaker, there is no question that since the NDP-Liberal government has been in place, crime has gone up in Canada. I gave some statistics, and in my riding it has gone up significantly. People I speak to in Saskatoon, particularly in my riding, are very concerned about this. It is causing many, many problems. Keep in mind that in Saskatoon there are all kinds of people. There are indigenous people, Métis people and immigrant people from all kinds of backgrounds. There is a wide variety of people who live in Saskatoon West, who are all impacted to a great degree by the crime happening. It is critical we get a handle on this and start to put in place laws that put back punishment for crimes and that will help us get crimes back on a downward trajectory to make our community safer and make Saskatoon a safer place.