Madam Speaker, as I indicated in my question, I appreciate many of the comments the member from the Bloc party has raised here this afternoon. I think this is very much a responsible approach to deal with the legislation that we have before us. I can assure the member that many of the concerns and questions she has raised will no doubt be talked about extensively during the committee process. Hopefully, the member will be able to get the answers she is looking for.
Obviously, we have a minister who is committed to getting the legislation through. I appreciate the frankness and the manner in which the Bloc appears to be supporting the legislation. Ultimately, we will have to wait and see what sort of priority the opposition, collectively, will put on this legislation.
It is important for us to recognize, right at the beginning, why legislation of this nature has become such a priority. Canada's new Prime Minister, along with the cabinet, members of the Liberal caucus and others, understands that things have changed a great deal over the past year. We have seen great emphasis put on the border between Canada and the United States. Border security concerns have been elevated to a degree I have not seen in my many years of being a parliamentarian. We have a prime minister who recognizes just how important it is that the government act quickly to address a number of those concerns. That is the reason why Bill C-2 was introduced as early as it was. The Prime Minister was amplifying just how important border control is because of some of the crimes being committed in Canada. He has made it a priority in Bill C-2.
In listening to the many comments thus far, both from the Bloc and the Conservatives, I can appreciate that there are aspects of Bill C-2 they are concerned about to the degree where the legislation was not receiving the type of support that can see it go to committee in a quick fashion. In fact, I believe we had just over 18 hours of actual debate on Bill C-2.
There are some issues within Bill C-2 that are somewhat contentious, and concerns have been raised about them. However, just because they are not necessarily incorporated in Bill C-12, which we are debating today, it does not take away from the importance of other measures in Bill C-2. It is important that we recognize it is not just the government's opinion but also that of stakeholders, particularly law enforcement agencies. We recognize there are many aspects of Bill C-2 that address concerns Canadians justifiably want to see some form of action taken on.
To those who have been following Bill C-2, the government is not saying no. It recognizes that we need to get other aspects incorporated into Bill C-2 to move it more quickly through the House of Commons. We believe that the legislation we are proposing today deals with these concerns to a degree where we will hopefully see the bill get to the committee stage.
We need to take a look at the changing dynamic that Canada is facing today, compared to where it was a year ago. One only needs to look at the last national election in the United States. President Trump has made it very clear that he has concerns on a number of fronts with respect to Canada and Mexico. He wants to see specific actions taken in order to foster more co-operation, if I could put it that way.
I will use the issue of fentanyl as an example.
The United States says that fentanyl coming from Canada into the United States is a huge problem. I believe that what is being brought into the United States is less than 1%, but we still take it seriously. The Prime Minister has been very clear about the impact fentanyl is having not only in our communities but also in other nations. He recognizes the impact that drugs coming into Canada is having.
Back in late spring, the government attempted to address concerns expressed on many occasions about how Canada Post was obligated to deliver first-class mail, or size 10 envelopes, which are just standard envelopes. Canada Post was being used to distribute fentanyl in my province and in particular in northern communities. This is a legitimate concern that comes from stakeholders in rural Manitoba. The government responded by ensuring there are more checks in place to minimize the amount of fentanyl going through Canada Post. That is the goal. The Prime Minister, cabinet and the Liberal caucus want to see less fentanyl in our communities. Whether it is through Bill C-2 or Bill C-12, and our talking about the principles of these, this is what we are hoping to accomplish.
Stronger borders is another issue that has been of great concern in the last 12 months. Actually, it has been less than 12 months. Again, we have the newly elected Prime Minister. He was elected back in April. He has committed not only legislation but also budgetary measures to this. A budget is coming on November 4. We often receive questions about RCMP officers, Canada border control officers and the commitment the Prime Minister has made.
It is no small commitment. The Prime Minister says that we are serious about securing Canada's borders. This means not only bringing in Bill C-2, which would provide extra strength, but also factoring in 1,000 new RCMP officers and 1,000 new border control officers. This is a significant commitment that goes over and above the legislation. As a government, we recognize that we can bring forward legislation and that, in this situation, there is a need to put more boots on the ground. This is something that will be materializing. I suspect we will hear more about that on November 4, when we present the fall budget to Canadians through the House of Commons.
The legislative component is absolutely critical. The sharing of information is so important. Things have changed over the years. We all know that, through technology and the advancement of the Internet, there are things that can be done through the Internet with all the different types of weapons out there. I am not just talking about guns. Weapons can take many different forms. There is a need for legislation of this nature.
Bill C-12 has two pillars. The first is securing the border and the second is combatting transnational organized crime in terms of things like illegal fentanyl and illicit financing. These are the types of issues being dealt with in this legislation.
I want to recognize the efforts of our border control officers. There are interesting statistics, which we always like to talk about. Whether it is the RCMP or our border control officers, I do not think we give them enough credit for the fine work they do. When I say “we”, I am talking about parliamentarians as a whole and, even beyond the House of Commons, provincial politicians. To give a sense of the type of work that border control officers do for us, I will provide some statistics from January 1 to September 19 of this year. These are all seizures by the Canada border security agents.
Regarding cannabis products, somewhere in the neighbourhood of 37,467,000 grams were seized. For hashish, it was 379,000 grams. For cocaine or crack, it was 2,702,000 grams. For heroin, it was 73,946 grams. There were 770,534 grams of other opioids and 22,237,913 grams of other types of drugs seized. With regard to firearms, something that is constantly discussed, 662 firearms and 11,119 prohibited weapons were seized. In terms of hard dollars, it amounted to $29,961,000. In suspected proceeds of crime, the amount was $2,919,000. This work was done in the first nine months of the year. That is why I say the work our Canada border control officers do for us is so critically important, as is the RCMP's.
I asked the Conservative shadow minister or critic a very specific question related to the RCMP. I want to raise this because I take it very seriously, as I know Canadians do. When I posed my question to the Conservative opposition critic, he chose to sidestep the issue and not answer. It is the same question I posed to the minister responsible for introducing Bill C-12, and it is in relation to the RCMP.
I am offended because, over the last number of days, there has been a lot of news and social media coverage about a statement the leader of the Conservative Party made. The Winnipeg Free Press said that the leader of the Conservative Party called the leadership of the RCMP “despicable”. That is a very important issue in this debate. The government says it is going to increase security at our border, reinforce the strength of the RCMP by investing in another 1,000 officers and that we should, collectively, support those two institutions.
As I indicated, the RCMP as an institution is recognized around the world as a first-class security and law enforcement agency. Let there be absolutely no doubt about that. A politician who says that the leadership of the RCMP is despicable, and goes on in great detail, does a disservice not only to the institution of the RCMP but to all of us who sit inside the House, let alone if it is the leader of Canada's official opposition making that statement.
That is why I posed the question earlier to my colleague across the way from the Conservative Party, who was appointed by the leader of the Conservative Party to take on the role of shadow minister: Does he support what the leader of the Conservative Party is saying? I respect, to a certain degree, that the member chose not to answer the question. I suspect that he understands why it was not an appropriate thing for the leader of the official opposition to say. I believe that the leader of the official opposition owes an apology to all Canadians on this issue. What is despicable, and I would add a few other words to that, is the damage that it causes when the leader of the official opposition makes comments of that nature. I would suggest that the leader of the official opposition owes a sincere apology inside the House to all Canadians for saying what he has said.
Bill C-12 would amend the accelerated scheduling pathway that allows precursor chemicals that can be used to produce illicit drugs to be rapidly controlled by the Minister of Health. This would allow law and border enforcement agencies to take swift action to prevent the illegal importation and use of precursor chemicals and would at the same time ensure strict federal oversight over any legitimate use of these chemicals. The legislation would also provide more strength in terms of the anti-terrorist-financing regime, including through stronger anti-money-laundering penalties.
With respect to the substance of the legislation, the Bloc member referred to the Coast Guard, saying that the Coast Guard would have expanded responsibility. I believe that the sharing of information that a Coast Guard can receive can be exceptionally valuable in terms of the security of our nation. As a result, I agree that there need to be checks in place related to privacy and actions that would not adhere to our Constitution, but at the end of the day, that is valuable information and I would suggest that this information, if accessed appropriately, can ultimately save lives and a whole lot more. That is the reason some of the initiatives Bill C-12 would bring in add more value to the legislation. It becomes a question of whether we want to see that sharing of information, either with the Coast Guard or with immigration.
If I had another 20 minutes, I could go into detail as to why we need to protect the integrity of the system and to be able to recognize that there is abuse within the system and that there is the potential for significant abuse. These amendments are absolutely critical for dealing with the issue of asylum, for example.
Many issues that I have, whether they are related to asylum or other issues related to security, can best be addressed in one-on-one discussions and debates and by the presenters who go before the standing committee.
We have had Bill C-2. We now have Bill C-12. I hope we will see the legislation pass—