Debates of Oct. 21st, 2025

Auditor General of Canada

[The Speaker, Francis Scarpaleggia]

It is my duty to lay upon the table, pursuant to subsection 7(3) of the Auditor General Act, the fall 2025 reports of the Auditor General of Canada.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(3)(g), these documents are deemed permanently referred to the Standing Committee on Public Accounts.

An Act to Implement the Protocol on the Accession of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership

[Maninder Sidhu, Liberal, Minister of International Trade]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-13, An Act to implement the Protocol on the Accession of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

Government Operations and Estimates

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the third report of the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates, widely known as the mighty OGGO, entitled “Purchase and Sale of the Official Residence for the Consul General of Canada in New York City”.

Pursuant to Standing Order 109, the committee requests that the government table a comprehensive response to this report.

Employment Insurance Act

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C‑249, An Act to amend the Employment Insurance Act (combined weeks of benefits rule and certain benefits).

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in the House to introduce this important bill. Employment insurance has been in need of a major reform for years. The Liberals promised to reform the system but then did nothing. This bill seeks to correct two completely unacceptable situations that are easy to fix.

When someone comes back from maternity leave and loses their job, they are not eligible for employment insurance benefits because their qualifying period is too short. This bill will remedy this ridiculous situation that mainly affects women.

This bill will also correct another situation. People who are eligible for EI sickness benefits are entitled to up to 26 weeks, while family caregivers, who are often women, are entitled to only 15 weeks. It is completely ridiculous that the person helping the sick person does not have access to the same number of weeks of benefits as the sick person.

My bill would quickly remedy these two situations, which mainly affect women. I hope it will receive the unanimous support of the House.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

Flight Attendants’ Remunerations Act

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-250, An Act to amend the Canada Labour Code (flight attendants).

Mr. Speaker, today I rise to introduce the flight attendants' remunerations act.

I thank the hon. member for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie for seconding this bill and for his tireless advocacy for workers' rights.

The legislation addresses a long-standing injustice in Canada's airline industry: the widespread practice of having flight attendants do unpaid work. Canadian flight attendants are currently expected to perform a range of essential duties without compensation when the aircraft is not in motion. This is unacceptable and must end. No one in Canada should be expected to work without pay.

The bill would require airlines to compensate flight attendants for all hours worked, including pre-flight, postflight and training time. It is about ensuring fairness and recognizing the critical role flight attendants play in keeping our vital air transport system moving and passengers safe.

I urge all members to support the bill and end unpaid work in the airline industry once and for all.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

Customs Act

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot—Acton, QC]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-251, An Act to amend the Customs Act and the Customs Tariff (forced labour and child labour).

Mr. Speaker, only one shipment from all regions of origin combined has been seized and detained at Canadian customs due to the use of forced labour in the manufacturing of the products it contained.

In contrast, the United States has seized millions of U.S. dollars' worth of goods arriving from a single region of origin. One thing cannot be denied: The Canadian model is a failure. The Liberal government must be aware of this, since it committed to tabling a similar bill before the end of the year in the 2023 and 2024 budgets, and yet it did not do so.

I am therefore pleased to table this bill today, which will emulate the U.S. model in that the importer will bear the burden of proving that goods originating from certain entities were not produced using forced labour. That is what is in effect in the United States, and this system is working very well. We do not want our goods to be tainted with blood.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

Public Safety

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Riding Mountain, MB]

Mr. Speaker, it is a privilege to present a petition on behalf of the constituents of Riding Mountain.

The people of Swan River are experiencing an alarming increase in violent crime that has threatened the safety and well-being of families across our region. A recent report by the Manitoba West District RCMP found that over an 18-month period, just two offenders in Swan River were responsible for over 150 responses and offences.

Petitioners continue to suffer the consequences of soft-on-crime Liberal policies, such as Bill C-5, which repealed mandatory jail time for serious crimes, and Bill C-75, which forces judges to release repeat violent offenders right back onto the street.

Petitioners in the Swan River Valley want to see an end to the Liberals' reckless catch-and-release policies so that criminals stay behind bars. This is why the people of Swan River are demanding jail, not bail for repeat violent offenders.

I support the good people of Swan River.

Brain Injury

[Gord Johns, NDP, Courtenay—Alberni, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I rise to present e-petition 6620, which was signed by over 1,000 Canadians, who are calling for urgent federal leadership of brain injury awareness, prevention and treatment.

The petitioners note that brain injuries can occur in many ways, from accidents to illnesses and strokes, and they often result in serious physical, cognitive, emotional and behavioural effects. They further point out that brain injuries are frequently linked with other challenges, including substance use and homelessness, creating additional barriers for those affected. It is estimated that 1.6 million Canadians are living with a brain injury today, yet there is no coordinated national response.

The petitioners therefore call upon the Government of Canada to develop a national strategy on brain injuries to improve awareness and prevention, as well as to ensure better access to treatment, rehabilitation and recovery supports for Canadians living with the impacts of brain injury.

Cephalopod Farming

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Mr. Speaker, petitioners have asked me to speak on their behalf as constituents of Saanich—Gulf Islands concerned about a new and emerging industry, believe it or not, of cephalopod farming. That is, in fact, octopus and squid farming. The animals are bred in captivity, slaughtered for human consumption.

Canada currently has no legislation to regulate or govern this emerging potential industry, and certainly, in the wild, cephalopods are solitary, wild animals that are ill-suited to be raised in captivity and recognized as sentient beings. Therefore, the petitioners ask that the Government of Canada act in response to this threat, ban the importation of farmed cephalopod products and prohibit the breeding and raising of cephalopods in captivity in Canada.

Airport Workers

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I have two petitions that I would like to table in the House today.

The first pertains to people who are concerned about the working and living conditions of airport workers, who earn very low wages in very precarious conditions despite their years of service.

The Vancouver Airport Authority has declared that it offers a living wage and encourages all service providers to provide a living wage to their employees. The Greater Toronto Airport Authority has issued a document that states in its employment standards section that all airport employers are encouraged to provide wages that allow workers the ability to afford shelter, food and basic necessities.

Hundreds of people are writing to the Government of Canada calling for an increase in the living wage for airport workers.

Monkey Imports from Cambodia

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the second petition is signed by thousands of people who are concerned about the importation of macaques from Cambodia.

In 2022, the International Union for Conservation of Nature raised the classification of long-tailed macaques from “vulnerable” to “endangered”, pointing to their exploitation by the experimentation industry as a factor in the species' plummeting numbers and heightened risk of extinction.

In 2023, the U.S. stopped importing monkeys from Cambodia because authorities amassed evidence that permits were falsified. Meanwhile, imports of long-tailed macaques from Cambodia to Canada increased by 350% in just one year.

These thousands of people are calling on Environment Canada and the Minister of Environment and Climate Change to order an immediate suspension of all endangered monkey imports from Cambodia.

Questions on the Order Paper

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

Mr. Speaker, I would ask that all questions be allowed to stand, please.

[The Speaker, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Is it agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

The House resumed from October 20 consideration of the motion that Bill C-12, An Act respecting certain measures relating to the security of Canada's borders and the integrity of the Canadian immigration system and respecting other related security measures, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Strengthening Canada's Immigration System and Borders Act

[Aslam Rana, Liberal, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin by acknowledging that we are gathered today on the traditional and unceded territory of the Algonquin and Anishinabe people.

I am pleased to rise in the chamber to speak about the ways we can and must improve Canada's asylum system through the legislative amendments proposed in Bill C-12.

Canada's immigration system has long been a source of pride and a key driver of economic growth. As global migration patterns evolve due to conflicts and crises, the government is committed to restoring balance and trust by building a more flexible and responsive system that safely manages the flow of people entering the country. The bill is an important and timely opportunity to address the mounting challenges Canada faces at our borders. I will go through some of these challenges and how the legislative changes in the bill would guide us toward a more secure and productive future.

The first challenge facing many countries is the sharp rise in the number of people seeking asylum. Millions of people continue to flee conflict, persecution and instability, driving one of the most significant global migration shifts in modern history. Migration patterns are also evolving as people move across borders and oceans in search of safety and opportunity. Canada continues to be a destination of choice for those looking to build a better future.

In 2022, Canada processed over 91,000 asylum claims. That number rose to over 143,000 in 2023 and to over 171,000 in 2024, nearly doubling in just two years. Our system has been strained by this increase. It has caused lengthy processing time and backlogs, as well as prolonged uncertainty for claimants.

The bill puts forward amendments to improve the efficiency of asylum claim processing so that claimants would receive the fast, fair and final decisions they deserve. The proposed changes touch multiple parts of the process, from initial entry to timelines for decisions and follow-up actions. The focus is on the streamlining of operations while maintaining fairness and security.

To start with, the bill proposes using a single online application for all claims. Right now, applications can be different depending on where the claim is made, whether that is at an airport, a land border office or an immigration office in Canada. A single online application would allow information to be shared more easily across Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada; the Canada Border Services Agency; and the decision-making body, the Immigration and Refugee Board. The change would make the process more efficient for everyone.

Next, we propose to enhance due diligence and reduce backlogs by making sure a claim is hearing-ready before it is referred to the Immigration and Refugee Board to schedule a hearing. Ensuring that only hearing-ready files are referred to the board would allow cases to be scheduled more confidently, reducing the need to postpone or follow up on incomplete files. The change would also strengthen program integrity by minimizing the back and forth between organizations.

We also propose to improve the system by making it easier for the Immigration and Refugee Board to remove incomplete or unresponsive claims from caseload inventories. According to the bill, the board's refugee protection division would have the authority to determine that an application has been abandoned when a claimant fails to comply with certain requirements. It already has the authority to deem an asylum claim abandoned after it has been referred to it. It would now also be able to deem the claim abandoned if the requirements are not met before referral, such as in the case of submitting an incomplete application or failing to respond to requests.

Claimants would still have the opportunity to explain why their claim should not be abandoned. The right would be enshrined in the legislation. Similarly, we propose to give the minister the authority to determine that a claim is withdrawn, following the request by a claimant or their representative. Today, it needs to be referred to the Immigration and Refugee Board for a separate withdrawal process.

To assist with faster decision-making, we propose to officially transfer scheduling authority to the Immigration and Refugee Board. We would also mandate that in-Canada asylum claims can be adjudicated by the board only while the claimant is physically present in Canada. Likewise, admissibility hearings could also be held only while a person is here in Canada. These changes would help protect against fraud, reduce the need for postponements and maximize the availability of resources.

The bill next addresses how to mitigate sudden increases in asylum claims and reduce pressure on the asylum system, while deterring those who may look to misuse the system. Canada's asylum system is already under significant strain, and we need to protect against potential future surges and alleviate the backlog. The new provisions would provide protection for those in need, while discouraging claims from people seeking to use the asylum system to get around immigration rules or to extend their temporary stay in Canada.

That starts with creating an ineligibility rule for the claims that are not made within a reasonable timeline. The legislative changes would make claims made more than a year after the claimant first arrives in Canada ineligible to be referred to the Immigration and Refugee Board. This measure would apply to anyone who entered the country after June 24, 2020, including people in Canada on a work or study permit. It is meant to discourage misuse of the asylum system by those seeking a shortcut around regular immigration processes.

There are several practical reasons for the amendment. The one-year time limit was chosen because a significant majority of people make a claim within their first year of being in Canada. The use of a one-year period is also a clear and easily communicated timeline for asylum seekers to understand the period in which their claim may be found eligible. The amendment would capture the claims of anyone who entered Canada after June 24, 2020, and it would apply whether the person has current valid status or has renewed their status, whether their status has expired or whether they were issued a new permit because the one-year starting point for the eligibility will be their first entry into Canada.

While irregular border crossings have dropped significantly since the Safe Third Country Agreement was expanded in 2023, we still want to make a targeted legislative amendment. Under this change, foreign nationals who cross irregularly into Canada from the U.S. and make an asylum claim after 14 days would no longer have their claim referred to the Immigration and Refugee Board.

Crossing into Canada between official border crossings is illegal and dangerous. We always urge people to use safe, regular pathways to enter our country, and always at ports of entry. People whose claims are found ineligible under the new rules would be able to apply for a pre-removal risk assessment to ensure that they are not being returned to a country or a situation where they would face persecution or serious harm.

A third challenge Canada needs to be better equipped to face is another major world event like the COVID-19 pandemic. When that started, people put their travel plans on hold, but Canada's inventory of applications continued to grow. The current laws allow us to act in certain cases with individual documents, but not on a large scale in response to wide-ranging emergencies.

We do not have the ability to cancel, suspend or change large numbers of immigration documents, which limits our management and response to unpredictable scenarios when needed. The legislation would allow the government to act on a large scale for immigration documents, like temporary resident visas, eTAs and permits. The government could also pause acceptance of new applications and suspend or cancel applications in our inventory when it is in the public interest to do so. Giving Canada more control over its immigration documents would allow us to respond to exceptional events in ways that protect Canadians and our public resources.

A well-managed and efficient asylum system does more than uphold our international obligations; it ensures protection for the world's most vulnerable people while helping Canada maintain stability and compassion in an increasingly unpredictable world. The government is committed to strengthening Canadians' trust in the integrity of our immigration system. We do that by making sure our system remains fair and compassionate for those who are seeking our protection, while being effective, orderly and reliable for the country as a whole.

The measures in Bill C-12 would help reinforce program integrity, speed up processing and offer greater clarity and certainty to people fleeing conflict and persecution when they need it most. We would be strengthening the system to reflect these realities and to prepare for the challenges of tomorrow.

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

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate my colleague's thoughts and expressions on the whole asylum issue. I think it is worthy of note that, whether it is with respect to the asylum issues in 2012 or those today, there is a time when we need to look at ways we can improve upon the system, and that is exactly what the legislation would do. It recognizes the need for change because of things that have taken place. Whether with respect to the pandemic or the wave of international students, there are some serious issues. By passing the legislation, we would be reforming the system.

I wonder whether my colleague can provide his thoughts on just how important it is that we pass the legislation because of the types of changes we need in immigration today.

[Aslam Rana, Liberal, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, we are committed to ensuring that our asylum system is efficient and flexible in the face of global crises.

Let me be clear: Canada's asylum system is not a shortcut. That is why we introduced the measures: to reduce pressure on our system and protect it from a sudden rise in claims.

[Jeremy Patzer, Conservative, Swift Current—Grasslands—Kindersley, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I could not help but notice that, although we are debating the border bill today, the government already tabled a bill earlier in the current Parliament and has already had to basically withdraw it and present a new bill because it messed up the first one so badly.

I know that my colleague is newer to Parliament. I wonder how he feels so far about his own government's messing up so badly that, here in Parliament, Bill C-12 is already a redo of one of the bills it had already tabled.

[Aslam Rana, Liberal, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, we introduced Bill C-12, the strengthening Canada's immigration system and borders act, to strengthen our borders and keep Canadians safe. The legislation would act on our government's commitment to ensuring that border and law enforcement officers have the tools they need to protect our communities. This includes measures to combat transnational organized crime and to protect the integrity of our immigration system, stop the flow of illegal fentanyl and weapons, and crack down on money laundering.

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

Mr. Speaker, I have a quick question for my colleague opposite about asylum seekers. We agree that Bill C‑12 is a step in the right direction. It will help improve the system.

However, let us look at the past 10 years. The Liberals came to power in 2015, and it is now 2025. They have been in power for 10 years. During that time, the number of asylum seekers and the number of people crossing the border illegally has skyrocketed.

Is my colleague proud of his government's record? In Quebec, resources are stretched thin. The Government of Quebec has repeatedly said that it is overwhelmed; it is no longer able to teach French to all these people and integrate them.

[Aslam Rana, Liberal, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, there is no ban on asylum claims. There is no ban at all.

While some individuals will be ineligible to claim asylum in certain specific circumstances, there are still safeguards in place to make sure legitimate claims are properly reviewed. Individuals will still have access to the pre-removal risk assessment. This process prevents people from being sent back to a country where they would face risks, such as persecution, torture or other harms.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I wonder if my hon. colleague for Hamilton Centre could provide any insight. I have asked previous Liberals speaking to Bill C-12 whether Bill C-2 is going to be withdrawn.

On the Order Paper, we now have two bills that are nearly identical. Both are unacceptable. Are there plans to withdraw Bill C-2?

[Aslam Rana, Liberal, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, we are not taking that bill out. We are strengthening and further moving toward Bill C-12. There are some changes being made to Bill C-2, and we are moving toward Bill C-12.

[Greg McLean, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I welcome my colleague to the House of Commons. This is the first time I have had a chance to hear him in debate.

I heard his speech, and then I heard every one of his responses, which were actually from his speech. This is called Q and A, questions and answers, where we actually engage to show how well we know the bill and what we want to do with it. This bill is a replacement for a bill that is already being withdrawn by the government. It is coming back to us, effectively asking what the Conservatives want.

Would the member submit that perhaps his government is putting words on paper for him to read in the House that are not going anywhere, that are just a waste of time? Does the member know how much it costs Canadian taxpayers to waste time in the House and to waste time putting bills on paper?