Debates of Sept. 25th, 2025

Opposition Motion—Food Taxation

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

Pursuant to Standing Order 45, the recorded division stands deferred until Wednesday, October 1, at the expiry of the time provided for Oral Questions.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, I suspect if you were to canvass the House, you would find unanimous consent at this point to call it 6:30 p.m. so that we can get to the late show.

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

Is it agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

A motion to adjourn the House under Standing Order 38 deemed to have been moved.

Public Safety

[Andrew Lawton, Conservative, Elgin—St. Thomas—London South, ON]

Madam Speaker, I had the opportunity to rise in this chamber not long ago and ask the Minister of Public Safety about the scourge of crime on streets in my own community back home and across the country. So much of this problem of rampant criminality is a direct consequence of Liberal government catch-and-release bail policies. These policies put repeat, often violent, offenders back on the streets, sometimes hours after they were arrested and charged and then released.

Police officers have been incredibly frustrated by this. We have been calling for action, as have provinces, municipalities, police agencies, victims' rights groups and businesses. Everyone has been calling for the government to act. The government has continued to allude to some sort of bail reform the members say is coming, but they have been shockingly scant on any of the details of what that bail reform will entail and, more importantly, whether it will involve repealing the principle of restraint. That is the section of the Criminal Code the Liberal bail law, Bill C-75, put in place compelling judges to release offenders under the least onerous conditions and at the earliest possible opportunity.

For all the systematic issues that we have been flagging as a party, that Canadians have been flagging, such as violent offenders being released and people being arrested for serious offences while out on bail, the case has been made. We can draw a direct line between this and the principle of restraint in Bill C-75. This is important because I asked the Minister of Public Safety about it, using an example from St. Thomas, Ontario, of a repeat offender, a homeless man, who was released on bail with the condition that he be home by 10 p.m., despite not having a home. This is an impossible bail condition that the police have no ability to enforce.

That matters because the public safety minister's representative, the Secretary of State for Combatting Crime, had the audacity to say that the government is “tough on crime”. She said that with a straight face, that the government is tough on crime, the government that has been the only stakeholder in the country not to acknowledge the bail crisis. When we have NDP leaders, Conservative leaders, provincial Liberal leaders who have broken ranks with their feckless, easy-on-crime and easy-on-criminals, hug-a-thug federal counterparts across the aisle here, they have all been in agreement that this is not a tough-on-crime government. This is instead a government that is tough on victims, a government that puts the rights of offenders above the rights of victims.

We get a strong sense of what the government has prioritized, despite claiming some bail legislation is coming at some point, maybe after the budget. Who knows? This is a government that has found it high enough on its agenda to propose a ban on large cash transactions. It has decided that banning people from buying a used car worth more than $10,000 is more important than bail reform. It has decided that confiscating firearms from law-abiding gun owners is more important than bail. It has announced it is going full steam ahead on that despite the public safety minister, not knowing he was being recorded, actually defending our arguments about this program's uselessness.

My question for the government is, how dare it claim to be tough on crime when it has been ignoring the pleas from virtually everyone else in the country to get serious about bail reform, to do it urgently, to do it imminently and, once and for all, to put the rights of victims first?

[Jacques Ramsay, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to have the opportunity to respond to the hon. member for Elgin—St. Thomas—London South, even though he is comparing apples to oranges. He is all over the map.

Let me begin by acknowledging the legitimate frustration many Canadians feel when they hear stories about repeat offenders being released on bail. These cases raise serious questions about the balance between public safety and individual rights, but we must be careful not to confuse symptoms with causes.

The example that was mentioned, of a homeless person released on bail with a curfew, does not demonstrate that a law was poorly drafted. Indeed, current law, as set out in the Criminal Code and confirmed by the Supreme Court, specifies that release conditions must be reasonable and appropriate. In this case, the court found that imposing a curfew on a homeless person was, at the very least, imprudent and unrealistic. When the law is clear, it is not up to Parliament to amend it; it is up to the courts to guide those who make the decisions on the ground.

To be clear, protecting the safety and security of Canadians demands collaboration from all levels of government. Our government is moving forward with ambitious reforms to the Criminal Code, but the provinces must also do their part. Too many of their courts and prisons are underfunded or overcrowded. The fact is, most bail determinations are made by justices of the peace, who are appointed by the provinces, not by Ottawa. Provincial prosecutors, who can and must challenge overly lenient decisions, are overwhelmed and under-resourced. Police and prosecutors need adequate support from the provinces to keep dangerous offenders behind bars.

At the federal level, our government has already taken action. In 2023, we introduced Bill C‑48 to tighten the rules for violent repeat offenders and those who use weapons, while strengthening protection for victims of intimate partner violence. These reforms were unanimously supported by every province and territory, including those with Conservative governments. That is federal leadership in action: bringing Canadians together and finding solutions that work.

We will do more. This fall, we will introduce legislation to make bail and sentencing rules even stricter, especially for organized crime, auto theft and human trafficking.

Unlike the opposition, we do not believe in empty slogans, like the “three strikes and you're out” rule. This rhetoric, aimed at scoring political points, solves nothing. It has failed everywhere it was put to the test in the United States. Even the Conservatives seem to have learned that lesson after losing the last election. In fact, despite campaigning on it, they did not even include the proposal in their bail legislation, Bill C‑242. I offer the member the opportunity to rise and clearly tell Canadians that he was wrong and that this proposal was in fact absurd.

Our Liberal government is committed to building a system that protects communities and addresses the causes of recidivism. For that, stronger laws are required. Investments in mental health, addiction treatment and community programs are also required. We will do our part, and we hope that the provinces will do theirs.

[Andrew Lawton, Conservative, Elgin—St. Thomas—London South, ON]

Madam Speaker, it is very important to talk about the causes of recidivism, notably the largest cause, which is the Liberal government and the bail laws that have allowed this to run so rampant.

No more than two hours ago, I heard from a police witness at the justice committee who said Bill C-48 did nothing to improve public safety. The government likes to lean on its record while ignoring the consequences of its record, according to the experts tasked with enforcing and upholding the law.

I came with solutions. I am proud to support the bill from the hon. member for Oxford, the Conservatives' jail not bail bill, and I hope the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety will do so as well instead of obstructing the real solutions that are before the House right now.

It is disgraceful that when confronted with the evidence, the parliamentary secretary and his Liberal colleagues do the same thing every time, which is to say it is someone else's fault and point their fingers at the provinces instead of looking in the mirror. When will they stop doing that?

[Jacques Ramsay, Liberal, La Prairie—Atateken, QC]

Madam Speaker, let me be clear. The federal government is committed to introducing legislation to strengthen the bail system in order to combat violent and organized crime. If someone is released on bail and has nowhere to go, that is not a failure of federal law. It is a failure of those who administer the justice system, and that is a provincial responsibility. It also means that provinces and territories must invest in mental health and addiction supports as well as supervision programs to make bail conditions enforceable and meaningful.

With regard to the Conservative proposal of a “three strikes” law, I note that the member did not take responsibility for the Conservatives' about-face. That said, Canadians will sleep better tonight knowing that the Conservatives, who had promised this approach, ultimately reneged on it by not including it in their Bill C‑242—

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

The hon. member for Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound.

[Alex Ruff, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

Madam Speaker, I am here tonight to follow up on a question that I asked the Minister of Justice back in June:

...violent crime has risen 32% since the Liberals formed government in 2015.

This is a fact across all of Canada, including in my riding where I am reading local headlines, titled “Arrested again” for “participation in a criminal organization”, “Failure to comply with a probation order”, “Eleven counts of knowledge of possession of a firearm while prohibited”, “Two counts of disobeying a court order” and “Two counts of breach of a weapons prohibition”.

...When will they repeal their soft-on-crime policies?

I am sorry. That was a question I asked the government in 2022.

Let me get to the right question. I asked this of the government:

...[the government] talked about and highlighted the need for our current bail system to be improved. Changes need to happen.

I have just two simple questions for [the government]. Does [the government] agree this is an urgent problem? How much time is realistic to address this urgent problem and make necessary changes to our bail system in Canada?

Here is the answer I got from the government:

No one piece of legislation is going to fix the issue of bail reform in our country. As I was trying to say, this is a multi-faceted problem. [The government needs] to engage the provincial, territorial and regional governments, and [it needs] to ensure they have the support they need to administer justice.

Over the past seven years...[the Liberal government has] been slowly putting in place legislation that is helping to improve the bail system and the bail regime in Canada....

My apologies. That was a question I asked in February 2023.

The actual question I asked in June was this:

...crime has been rising in my riding since the Liberals formed government, and justice is too often delayed for victims. According to the latest Owen Sound Police Service's annual report, violent crimes are up 14.6%. My communities are worried. To make matters worse, more than 10% of the cases are now exceeding the Jordan limit, delaying justice further.

When will the Liberal government reverse its soft-on-crime legislation and adopt a common-sense plan to keep violent offenders behind bars and ensure victims and their families get the justice they deserve?

The response I got from the Minister of Justice at the time is that he seemed to think it was all “good news”, that the Liberals were going to advance reform policies to “stiffen bail proceedings” and would “adopt more serious sentences for violent repeat offenders”. He said we could expect this later this calendar year. That answer was not good enough.

This has been an urgent problem, as I have highlighted. I am just one of many Conservative MPs who have been raising this question over the last four years. It is an urgent issue that needs to be addressed.

I followed up with the parliamentary secretary just last week and asked the same question about this “mythical bail reform bill that is going to come out this fall”. I asked whether fall is before December 12 and whether we could nail that down. The parliamentary secretary refused to answer the question. He just said it would be out this fall.

All I am looking for is clarity as to when this fall the government will table this urgently needed bail reform legislation. I just want a time frame, as it takes time to get legislation through the parliamentary system. The track record of the Liberal government is not great for getting legislation right the first time, so I am confident it is going to require amendments and improvements so that it works.

Can the House expect this bail reform tomorrow, next week or before the end of November, or will the government be tabling it on December 12, the last day of the fall session?

[Jacques Ramsay, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety]

Madam Speaker, I rise today to discuss the bail system and criminal justice policy. Recent tragic events, marked by violent crimes committed by repeat offenders, are a painful reminder of the impact these acts have on our communities. These situations are unacceptable.

I want to begin by offering my deepest condolences to the families of the victims, including the loved ones of Bailey McCourt in Kelowna and Abdul Aleem Farooqi in Vaughan.

Let us be clear. Our Liberal government is committed to fighting crime and keeping Canadians safe. In our 2025 platform, we promised to tighten bail rules for serious and organized crime, and we will.

Canadians have given us a clear mandate to act, and we will do so, whether it be in relation to car theft, organized crime, home invasions, human trafficking and smuggling. The Prime Minister and the Minister of Justice have also reiterated this commitment. We will introduce legislation this fall for stricter bail and sentencing measures. I hope my hon. colleague will be satisfied.

As everyone knows, the criminal justice system is a shared jurisdiction with the provinces and territories, which are responsible for administering the criminal justice system across the country. The federal government is working closely with the provinces and territories, including representatives from law enforcement agencies, to address concerns about the bail system and develop effective solutions. These issues will also be central to discussions among ministers in October at the meeting of federal, provincial and territorial ministers responsible for justice and public safety.

Last year, with the former Bill C‑48, we tightened the rules for violent repeat offenders and those who use weapons. This bill also strengthened protections for victims of domestic violence. All provinces and territories, including the Conservative ones, unanimously supported these reforms.

However, we know that there is still work to be done, of course. Our government recognizes the need to continue strengthening the Criminal Code provisions relating to bail. I can say with great confidence that the government continues to listen and make the necessary changes to address the concerns that have been raised.

I do want to point out that it is curious, to say the least, to see the strategy the Conservatives have chosen when it comes to making recommendations for bail reform. The “three strikes and you're out” motion they put forward last week was absurd. This policy has been a failure everywhere it has been tried. It is an idea that comes straight from the United States. I do not know if the official opposition remembers the last election, which it lost so decisively, but Canadians want made-in-Canada laws.

We agree that action is needed to keep repeat violent offenders off our streets, but this is Canada, not the United States, and the people of La Prairie—Atateken, whom I represent, want to keep it that way.

This fall, we will introduce a bill to improve our bail system, and I call on all parties to set partisanship aside and work with us to deliver the evidence-based solutions that Canadians expect and deserve.

[Alex Ruff, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

Madam Speaker, the parliamentary secretary failed to answer my question. In fact, he responded with a very similar reply to what I laid out in my earlier speech, which is that we need to work on this and talk about it.

He did provide some greater clarity. He said that they are going to have a meeting with the FPT sometime in October. That tells me just that we are not likely to get an answer to this question or see this bail reform until at least the November time frame. He has given me a slight clarification.

My point is that this is urgent. It is same thing I brought up in 2022 and 2023. We need this bail reform now. I ask the government to please table it so we can work together to make it the best possible bail reform. We need it for Canada and to make Canadians safe.

[Jacques Ramsay, Liberal, La Prairie—Atateken, QC]

Madam Speaker, I can hear the urgency in my hon. colleague's voice. We share his expectations.

However, I would remind him that, in the meantime, Bill C-2 still needs support and has to be passed. Other bills will follow in order, as quickly as the House sees fit. I invite my colleagues on the other side of the House to participate in the work and to co-operate fully.

We have better data on bail releases. We are now in a position to propose measures that will ensure that we can safely keep repeat offenders inside our institutions.

Public Services and Procurement

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Madam Speaker, at the beginning of the current Parliament, I stood in this place to call upon the government to give an answer to Canadians as to why they pay so much and get so little from the Liberal government.

Liberals gave away millions of dollars to GC Strategies, while federal departments could not prove whether there was any work done before authorizing payments. After investigating all of this, the Liberals have yet to get even a penny back from GC Strategies for stealing money from taxpayers, all while they increased their spending plans. The Liberals have spent millions of dollars trying to transform office space into housing, with little success.

In an audit conducted by the Auditor General, there were concerns with the government's seeming to determine success by commitments rather than achieved outcomes. The government has spent more than $1 billion on its promise to our allies that we would equip our pilots with a fleet capable of performing in combat, with the Auditor General noting that the increase in cost by 50%, from $19 billion to $27.7 billion, does not include at least another $5.5 billion needed to finish equipping the fighters to be ready for operations. She also reported in her audit that after years of waiting for the contract to procure, the government approved construction on military bases without critical information, which has led to greater delays and cost overruns.

Canadian families know all too well the cost of Liberal inflationary spending. They know it because they pay for it at the grocery store, where prices have gone up 50% faster than in the United States. They know it because far too many people have been priced out of the housing market and are unable to pay their mortgage or afford rent. They see it in every news story that breaks about mismanaged money given to Liberal insiders and high-priced consultants.

There is one taxpayer, and it is hard-working Canadians who are left to pay for all the government's failures. Canadians have kept up their end of the deal. There have been millions of taxpayer dollars given out to GC Strategies with little to no proof that work was done, millions of dollars spent on transforming office space with few results, and billions of dollars over budget to procure a fleet to arm our military with the tools it needs to keep Canadians safe.

I will reiterate my question from June: Why do Canadians who pay so much receive so little from the Liberal government?

[Jacques Ramsay, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety]

Madam Speaker, let me begin by saying that this new government firmly believes in fairness, openness, and transparency in all aspects of procurement management.

We are fully aware of past problems with respect to contracts and payments, particularly those made to GC Strategies and its predecessors in connection with previous investigations.

The latest report reveals that many contracts and payments were in violation of the applicable policy framework and that these contracts did not offer good value for money, which is totally unacceptable.

All governments have a responsibility to spend taxpayers' money with a clear commitment to optimizing resources, and the new government will maintain this commitment. It is more important than ever as we embark, as the member so aptly put it, on a series of new, nation-building construction projects. These are projects that will bring us together and transform our economy.

That is why, under the current government, the Minister of Public Works and Procurement had “Government Transformation” added to his title.

We have been moving forward at an unprecedented pace for years as we implement major projects that will unlock Canada's full economic potential and build a strong country. To create the type of country we need today, we have to change the way we work for Canadians, and that means changing the way we procure goods and services to become faster and more efficient.

At the same time, we need to ensure that rules are followed. After numerous investigations and reports related to the development of ArriveCAN, Public Services and Procurement Canada continues to implement measures that strengthen federal procurement, particularly as it relates to the procurement of professional services.

Only this week, the Auditor General of Canada told the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates that she was satisfied with the measures put in place.

As a reminder, these measures include implementing a number of provisions designed to strengthen procurement oversight; beefing up evaluation requirements to ensure that resources are properly qualified for the duties they are expected to perform; requiring greater transparency from suppliers about their prices and the subcontractors they use; and improving our own documentation practices when awarding contracts and authorizing tasks.

I would add that, following a thorough assessment of GC Strategies by the new office of supplier integrity and compliance, the company has been barred from entering into contracts or real property agreements with the Government of Canada for seven years, the most severe penalty.

When it comes to recovering funds, whether it is a case of fraud or simple overcharging, we will take legal action or collaborate with law enforcement agencies.

As stewards of the public purse, we know that government spending must always meet the highest standards of accountability. That is the promise we made to Canadians. They deserve nothing less.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Madam Speaker, the Auditor General appeared at committee just days ago to speak to the reports that were tabled this past June regarding the government's recent failures. The Auditor General found that, in its efforts to reduce the size of federal lands and transform them into affordable housing, the government is not only measuring success by agreements signed with the promise of completion but also not delivering on its own goal to provide affordable housing to those most in need.

In the case of GC Strategies, federal departments were found to have frequently disregarded policies meant to ensure that work was done and proper security clearances were issued.

These are not isolated incidences, and this is not a new government. We are going to get more of the same. It is a pattern repeated over and over again. Offering to follow the rules again is not going to cut it.

[Jacques Ramsay, Liberal, La Prairie—Atateken, QC]

Madam Speaker, our new government is committed to ensuring that federal procurement is open, fair and transparent.

We thank the Auditor General of Canada for undertaking these important studies and for her findings and recommendations. I would remind the hon. member that, just last week, the Auditor General of Canada finally told the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates that she was satisfied with the measures put in place.

We are making great strides as we evaluate our processes and find ways to continue strengthening procurement integrity.

We know we still have a lot more to do, but I can assure the House that we are improving our procurement processes to ensure that rules and procedures are followed and properly documented, without exception.

This is more important than ever as we take decisive action to shift our economy from reliance to resilience and build the major projects that will unlock Canada's full economic potential and build a strong country.

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

The motion that the House do now adjourn is deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly, the House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 10 a.m. pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 6:45 p.m.)