House of Commons Hansard #83 of the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was extortion.

Topics

line drawing of robot

This summary is computer-generated. Usually it’s accurate, but every now and then it’ll contain inaccuracies or total fabrications.

Petitions

Opposition Motion—Serious crimes and refugee claims Members debate rising extortion rates and Canada's justice and immigration systems. Conservatives propose barring non-citizens convicted of serious crimes or with active judicial proceedings from making refugee claims, ending leniency to avoid deportation, and repealing Bills C-5 and C-75, citing a "revolving door justice system." Liberals defend their "tough-on-crime" agenda, highlighting pending legislation like lawful access and bail reform, and accuse Conservatives of obstruction. The Bloc opposes the motion, raising concerns for political prisoners and potential legal challenges. 48900 words, 6 hours in 2 segments: 1 2.

Statements by Members

Question Period

The Conservatives focus on the rising cost of living, citing high food inflation, increasing consumer bankruptcies, and the impact of Liberal deficits and taxes. They condemn the surge in extortion and propose barring criminals from claiming refugee status. They also criticize subsidies for foreign-made electric vehicles amid Canadian auto job losses.
The Liberals highlight their strengthening economy, job creation, and investments in affordability for Canadians through tax cuts and benefits. They emphasize their auto strategy, investing in electric vehicle manufacturing and charging infrastructure. They also focus on tightening bail and sentences for extortion, improving lawful access, and taking control over immigration, while accusing the opposition of obstruction.
The Bloc criticizes government inconsistency on F-35 contracts, urging their suspension despite US reliability concerns. They also condemn the denial of 85,000 seniors facing Old Age Security benefit issues due to faulty Cúram software.
The NDP advocates for an independent foreign policy against the US blockade on Cuba and urges protection of universal healthcare.
The Greens raise a point of order concerning Bill C-2, arguing it violates the "same question rule" as much of its content is already in Bill C-12. They request its removal from the Order Paper or reintroduction with only unique sections like warrantless access.

Arab Heritage Month Act Second reading of Bill S-227. The bill, S-227, An Act respecting Arab Heritage Month, proposes designating April as Arab Heritage Month in Canada. Members from the Conservative, Bloc Québécois, and Liberal parties express support, highlighting the significant contributions of Arab Canadians to Canadian society, culture, and economy, and the importance of recognition, education, and belonging. The bill passed second reading and was referred to committee. 3200 words, 25 minutes.

Adjournment Debates

Pacific Salmon Strategy Initiative Gord Johns raises concerns about the sunsetting Pacific Salmon Strategy Initiative and the salmon allocation policy review. He stresses the need for stable funding and honest communication. Jaime Battiste highlights the government's investments and collaborations, assuring ongoing discussions and commitment to the sustainability of Pacific salmon.
High food prices Arpan Khanna raises concerns about high food prices, sharing a story about a senior considering MAID due to food insecurity, and blaming Liberal policies. Peter Fragiskatos acknowledges the problem, and asks Khanna to propose solutions. Khanna suggests removing hidden food taxes and tariffs, while Fragiskatos questions the impact of the carbon tax.
Was this summary helpful and accurate?

Automotive IndustryOral Questions

2:55 p.m.

Conservative

Kelly DeRidder Conservative Kitchener Centre, ON

Mr. Speaker, they are not investing in Canadian auto workers; they are subsidizing Tesla. Canadians are watching our auto sector get hammered by Trump slapping illegal, unjustified tariffs on Canadian-built cars, putting paycheques at risk in Ontario and in Kitchener. While Trump punishes Canadian workers, the government is rewarding the U.S. auto sector. I am wondering whose side they are on.

Can the government please explain why, at a time when Canadians need action, it is choosing to use taxpayer dollars to subsidize American-made vehicles? Why?

Automotive IndustryOral Questions

2:55 p.m.

Etobicoke North Ontario

Liberal

John Zerucelli LiberalSecretary of State (Labour)

Mr. Speaker, Canadians have created over 160,000 jobs since September. Wages are rising. Inflation is within target range. We know that certain sectors in the economy are facing impacts from the tariffs, from the trade war, but we have a plan, a plan that invests in workers, which is in our budget. That party has voted against it. Unfortunately, the members keep blocking the budget. If that member wants to make a difference, if she wants to help workers, it is important that they pass the budget. Let us go pass the budget. Let us stay all night and pass the budget.

Automotive IndustryOral Questions

2:55 p.m.

Liberal

Bienvenu-Olivier Ntumba Liberal Mont-Saint-Bruno—L’Acadie, QC

Mr. Speaker, the new automotive policy announced by our government marks a turning point for this industry. In this global political context, we are focusing on what we can control. This helps to provide more clarity and stability for our industry.

Can the Minister of Industry explain how this policy will build a stronger Canada, protect our economy and support Canada's auto industry?

Automotive IndustryOral Questions

2:55 p.m.

Ahuntsic-Cartierville Québec

Liberal

Mélanie Joly LiberalMinister of Industry and Minister responsible for Canada Economic Development for Quebec Regions

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Mont-Saint-Bruno—L'Acadie for his excellent work. He plays a very active role in our auto caucus.

He asked me a question about our auto strategy. It is an excellent strategy focused on two objectives. The first is domestic production. The second is electrification, because we believe that this is where the industry is headed. We do not want to simply be victims of the White House's decisions. We will be there for our auto sector in Ontario and across Quebec.

PensionsOral Questions

3 p.m.

Conservative

Éric Lefebvre Conservative Richmond—Arthabaska, QC

Mr. Speaker, the minister said to give her names. I gave her two names this week. Does she want the names, addresses and phone numbers of the 86,000 seniors who are waiting for their pension and GIS?

The Minister of Transport says that the system is being modernized. The projected cost of $1.6 billion has now reached $6.6 billion. The money the Liberals are spending is Canadians' hard-earned money. Meanwhile, our seniors are waiting to pay their rent and buy groceries.

Who is taking responsibility for this financial fiasco, and who is going to stand up and apologize?

PensionsOral Questions

3 p.m.

Thunder Bay—Superior North Ontario

Liberal

Patty Hajdu LiberalMinister of Jobs and Families and Minister responsible for the Federal Economic Development Agency for Northern Ontario

Mr. Speaker, I would be happy to sit down with the opposition member, but what he said is not true.

We are actually under budget for this modernization of a 60-year-old system, migrating more than 7.5 million Canadians to this new system. Of course, as we see challenges with specific applications, where maybe information is incorrect or maybe there are paper applications, the department is working urgently on those cases. If any MP here has a constituent who is not receiving their benefits in time and is in urgent need, please reach out to my office. We would be happy to help. Canadians can also contact Service Canada.

PensionsOral Questions

3 p.m.

Conservative

Gabriel Hardy Conservative Montmorency—Charlevoix, QC

Mr. Speaker, Valentine's Day is fast approaching. Unfortunately, there is very little love for the Liberals right now. Just ask the 86,000 pensioners who are definitely not in love with the new Cúram software, a faulty system that is depriving them of their money every month. We could also ask the public servants who are saying that this is the worst system ever designed.

Worst of all, Quebeckers and Canadians are realizing that the Liberals are once again spending their money irresponsibly. We are talking about a cost overrun of $5 billion. That is appalling.

Why do the Liberals always spend taxpayers' money recklessly, without accountability and without respect?

PensionsOral Questions

3 p.m.

Thunder Bay—Superior North Ontario

Liberal

Patty Hajdu LiberalMinister of Jobs and Families and Minister responsible for the Federal Economic Development Agency for Northern Ontario

Mr. Speaker, I am very grateful to the public servants who are working hard to learn a new system very quickly.

It is very important that we talk about these civil servants with the respect they deserve. In fact, at the beginning, of course it was challenging to learn that system. These workers have worked extremely hard to get better and more proficient at a brand new system. It is replacing a 60-year-old system. I challenge us all to think back to what a computer system that is 60 years old would look like. I am very proud of the civil servants who have worked so hard.

Forestry IndustryOral Questions

3 p.m.

Conservative

Jason Groleau Conservative Beauce, QC

Mr. Speaker, the Canadian forestry sector is being hit with unjustified U.S. tariffs of 45%. Liberal inaction continues to threaten the lumber industry and our workers. After 346 jobs were lost at the Domtar plant in Baie Comeau in January, this morning it was announced that 90 forestry workers in La Tuque and Montreal will be losing their jobs.

When will the Prime Minister start working with the Conservatives, get rid of the U.S. tariffs and stand up for forestry workers?

Forestry IndustryOral Questions

3 p.m.

Markham—Thornhill Ontario

Liberal

Tim Hodgson LiberalMinister of Energy and Natural Resources

Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind the member opposite that while the Conservatives are obstructing our progress, we have proposed $2.5 billion in support from the government to go to the forestry sector.

Workers and businesses know that American tariffs are what are causing the problem. Do these folks understand that it is the tariffs we need to be fighting, not each other?

Automotive IndustryOral Questions

3 p.m.

Liberal

Aslam Rana Liberal Hamilton Centre, ON

Mr. Speaker, Canadians want to choose electric vehicles, but they also want the confidence that they will be able to charge them where they live, work and travel. This is a critical component of the government's auto strategy.

Can the Minister of Energy and Natural Resources tell the House how today's announcement is helping build the charging infrastructure Canadians need while supporting jobs and investment across the country?

Automotive IndustryOral Questions

3 p.m.

Markham—Thornhill Ontario

Liberal

Tim Hodgson LiberalMinister of Energy and Natural Resources

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Hamilton Centre for the great work he is doing in his riding.

That is exactly what today's announcement is about. We are investing more than $97 million in 155 clean transportation projects across Canada, including $84 million to install 8,000 EV chargers, helping Canadians choose to drive electric with confidence. This builds on our progress today and supports our auto strategy by strengthening Canada's charging network, attracting private investment and keeping good jobs from coast to coast to coast.

Royal Canadian Mounted PoliceOral Questions

3:05 p.m.

Conservative

Todd Doherty Conservative Cariboo—Prince George, BC

Mr. Speaker, on November 25, 2021, a lone gunman circled the Vanderhoof RCMP detachment, spraying dozens of rounds into the particle board walls, narrowly missing the RCMP members working inside. They thought they were going to die that day. It is a miracle no one was killed.

The Liberal government promised it would stand with these members. It promised it would partner with the province and the District of Vanderhoof to build a new detachment, but five years later, the memories are still raw. The bullet holes remain, serving as a constant reminder of that horrific day.

The province is on board, and the District of Vanderhoof is on board, but the government is missing in action. Why is that?

Royal Canadian Mounted PoliceOral Questions

3:05 p.m.

Scarborough—Guildwood—Rouge Park Ontario

Liberal

Gary Anandasangaree LiberalMinister of Public Safety

Mr. Speaker, let me extend my deepest support to the individual RCMP officers who have been impacted.

I will work with Commissioner Duheme to ensure that those who require the support, including new facilities, are addressed. The work of RCMP frontline personnel across Canada is truly inspiring, and I want to thank each and every member for their service to Canada.

Foreign AffairsOral Questions

3:05 p.m.

NDP

Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister recently urged the global community to stand up to superpower intimidation and called on middle powers to stand together to resist it.

The United States has imposed an illegal blockade on Cuba for decades, crippling its economy and causing mass suffering to the Cuban people. Now Donald Trump is cutting off fuel, risking a humanitarian disaster.

Will the Prime Minister stay true to his words in Davos, uphold independent Canadian foreign policy and support Cuba in the face of aggressive U.S. imperialism?

Foreign AffairsOral Questions

3:05 p.m.

Oakville East Ontario

Liberal

Anita Anand LiberalMinister of Foreign Affairs

Mr. Speaker, we are deeply concerned by the deteriorating conditions in Cuba. Our consular officials are actively engaged. They stand ready to support Canadians in need. We are also working with the Cuban authorities and Canadian tourism stakeholders to ensure a timely and effective response.

We understand that aircraft carriers from Canadian airlines will be picking up Canadians. Our top priority will always be the safety and security of Canadians, and our foreign policy is based on that.

HealthOral Questions

3:05 p.m.

NDP

Gord Johns NDP Courtenay—Alberni, BC

Mr. Speaker, Alberta's Bill 11 is American-style two-tier medicine. It allows doctors to bill privately while also billing the public system, and it allows private insurance for medically necessary care. This breaks the promise of Canadian medicare, creating one system for the wealthy and one where the rest of us are left waiting even longer.

The minister said she would look into it, but it has been two months and we have heard nothing. Will she stop stalling, enforce the Canada Health Act and protect Canada's universal health care system?

HealthOral Questions

3:05 p.m.

Papineau Québec

Liberal

Marjorie Michel LiberalMinister of Health

Mr. Speaker, I would like to tell my colleague that, yes, we are working with Health Canada's legal services to see what the Alberta legislation does. I am working closely with my counterpart in the province. When I know more, I will come back to say whether that legislation complies with the Canada Health Act.

As I have said several times before in this House, I am the guardian of the Canada Health Act for Canadians.

Presence in GalleryOral Questions

3:05 p.m.

The Speaker Francis Scarpaleggia

I wish to draw the attention of members to the presence in the gallery of the Hon. Charmaine A. Williams, associate minister of women's social and economic opportunity for Ontario.

Presence in GalleryOral Questions

3:05 p.m.

Some hon. members

Hear, hear!

Similarities Between Bill C-2 and Bill C-12Points of OrderOral Questions

3:10 p.m.

Green

Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order.

During the course of debate today, numerous times, numerous Liberal members made reference to Bill C-2, which was named the strong borders act when it was introduced in June. The trouble, and I will try to be succinct, is that Bill C-2 cannot be put forward for a vote. It is in violation at this moment. It would only be acceptable for it to sit on a shelf covered in dust until the government removes all the sections that have already been carried in C-12 and are identical to those still in Bill C-2. This would encompass, in Bill C-2, parts 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12. This is because the rule in this place, known traditionally as the same question rule, prohibits any government or any member from bringing forward legislation that is substantially the same.

In this case, we know Bill C-2 came forward in June. I thought, when I saw Bill C-12, that the government would remove Bill C-2 from the Order Paper. I was informed later by the minister responsible that the intention was to reintroduce Bill C-2 with only those sections that related to warrantless access, as the rest of Bill C-2 had been put into Bill C-12.

As such, I would like to direct the Speaker to House of Commons Procedure and Practice, fourth edition, 2025, in which he will find on this particular issue of concern, the same question, that a bill adopted “cannot be revived in the same session.”

Mr. Speaker, I would ask you to please consider the matter and direct the government to immediately remove Bill C-2 from the Order Paper until such time as it can reintroduce it with only those sections that have not yet been adopted, the warrantless access sections.

I also draw the Speaker's attention to the fact that the Secretary of State for Combatting Crime called for Bill C-2 to be passed. That violates the same question rule.

Even worse is the part the Speaker will find in Hansard. The Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons asked for unanimous consent to pass Bill C-2 immediately. Fortunately, I said no. Otherwise, the government would have found itself in error and contravening all our rules. Should the member have happened to achieve unanimous consent, the government would have violated the same question rule.

Similarities Between Bill C-2 and Bill C-12Points of OrderOral Questions

3:10 p.m.

The Speaker Francis Scarpaleggia

I thank the hon. member for that elucidation. I will consider the hon. member's comments and get back to the House.

Similarities Between Bill C-2 and Bill C-12Points of OrderOral Questions

3:10 p.m.

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, my intention when I asked for unanimous consent on Bill C-2 was to get it to committee stage, not to pass it through the House.

The House resumed consideration of the motion.

Opposition Motion—Serious crimes and refugee claimsBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

February 10th, 2026 / 3:10 p.m.

Liberal

Parm Bains Liberal Richmond East—Steveston, BC

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for St. Catharines.

Today, I will focus on how our immigration system responds to concerns about non-citizens who are accused or convicted of serious criminal offences, as well as the decision-making process of admitting, investigating and removing a non-citizen.

I want to emphasize how upholding these rules, and the independence of these processes, is critical to our country. Canadians rightly expect that our immigration system will protect everyone in this country and that our laws are applied consistently and respond to their concerns, especially concerns about serious criminal acts. We want the decisions of our justice and immigration systems to be fair, efficient and final, and we expect that these decisions are made thoughtfully, lawfully and in alignment with our democratic values.

Serious criminality has serious consequences in this country. These cases are deeply troubling, and our hearts go out to victims and their families. Our laws are already clear: Individuals who commit serious crimes face consequences. Immigration law is clear that serious criminality has serious implications for admissibility and continued presence in Canada.

Before going further, it is important to clarify roles. Criminal investigations, prosecutions, sentencing and court procedures fall within the authority of police services, prosecutors and the courts. Those matters are addressed by other departments. My remarks today will focus on immigration consequences under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.

Security and public safety measures begin before arrival. Canada's immigration screening process is intentionally multi-layered. It involves Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada; the Canada Border Services Agency; and the Canadian Security Intelligence Service. Every applicant is assessed for criminality, terrorism, human rights violations, organized crime, espionage and public health risks, despite a lot of the misinformation we hear coming from the other side. Screening occurs before travel, at the border, and where necessary, after entry into Canada. This layered approach ensures that the system is responsive, adaptable and capable of addressing evolving threats.

To enhance our control over the system, our government has prioritized strengthening document control in recent years. Since January 2025, explicit authorities came into force for our immigration and border officers to cancel temporary resident documents, such as visas and electronic travel authorizations, on a case-by-case basis, when new information comes to light that someone is inadmissible or is no longer eligible to hold their document. They also have the authority in more limited circumstances to cancel study and work permits. This helps Canadians keep Canadians safe and migration orderly.

Additionally, we are seeking new authorities under Bill C-12 that would further strengthen the government's ability to manage immigration documents and applications. Included within these authorities are measures that would authorize the Governor in Council to make an order, when it is in the public interest, to cancel, suspend or change groups of immigration documents, to pause or suspend application processing or to stop the intake of new applications on a large scale. These authorities would ensure that the government is better able to manage immigration documents and applications when required to protect the public interest.

This is just one example of how IRCC is continually strengthening control over our immigration and asylum systems to the benefit of Canadians and communities. Additionally, we work closely with domestic and international partners to identify risks, share information and respond to concerns as they are identified.

The system is proactive as well as reactive. When misrepresentation or criminal history is discovered, individuals may be found inadmissible on the grounds of serious criminality and misrepresentation. Officials can move immediately under the law to issue a removal order.

Under the Refugee and Immigration Protection Act, Parliament has carefully balanced thresholds for inadmissibility and removal based on Canadian law and international obligations, including our obligations not to create stateless people and not to return people to danger.

The act already contains some of the strictest provisions among like-minded and democratic countries. Non-citizens convicted of serious criminality are inadmissible to Canada. Those sentenced to six months or more of imprisonment have no right of appeal to the immigration appeal division.

There is no special treatment for criminals, including violent offenders, under Canada's immigration law. Criminal proceedings take precedence over immigration proceedings. When a non-citizen is convicted of a serious crime, they must serve their sentence, and immigration consequences follow. These consequences are set out in legislation and applied through established legal processes. These serious criminal convictions mean people are subject to a removal order.

The Canada Border Services Agency is empowered to investigate, issue removal orders and carry out deportations. Its work is governed by the laws set by Parliament, following due process. Decisions are subject to review by the courts to place a check against potential errors.

Effective immigration enforcement is not measured by rhetoric but by results, and the results demonstrate that Canada's enforcement system is active and effective. In 2023-24, the Canada Border Services Agency prevented more than 9,000 individuals from boarding flights to Canada and denied entry to 34,000 people at ports of entry. Within Canada, the CBSA removed well over 700 individuals found inadmissible for serious criminality. The results for the first 10 months of 2025 surpassed the results for 12 months in 2024, showing sustained progress.

Canadians want an immigration system that is fast and efficient and that upholds the independence of our judicial and law enforcement systems. That is why our focus has been on a system that carefully screens applicants, responds to new information and applies the laws consistently.

We have introduced measures to make the system stronger and more efficient. For example, Bill C-12 introduces strong information sharing and coordination across departments, things that are essential to public safety. This measure could reduce the amount of time it takes to detect a problematic security issue and take action.

When programs operate in silos, discrepancies and risks can be missed. Bill C-12 would modernize information-sharing authorities within IRCC and with authorized domestic partners to strengthen integrity and improve decision-making. These authorities would allow the Department of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship to share identity, status and document information with domestic partners when there is a lawful purpose for doing so, and that includes with our law enforcement.

The new information-sharing authorities would reduce duplication, improve efficiency and enhance program integrity. They would do this while protecting privacy. Any new use or disclosure of personal information from these new authorities would remain subject to existing privacy legislation, policies, guidelines and best practices, including privacy impact assessments. These safeguards would ensure that integrity measures are balanced with a strong protection of personal information.

It is important to be clear about what Bill C-12 would and would not change in relation to criminality and removals. Bill C-12 would not alter existing thresholds for inadmissibility or removal. Canadian law already establishes a threshold for serious criminality for the purpose of inadmissibility, one that, unlike the Conservatives' failed proposals, would not risk targeting the wrong people or providing relative leniency to temporary residents compared to permanent residents.

We will uphold tough measures to address criminals, as well as the due process that demonstrates to us, to all residents of Canada, that we respect democracy and the rule of law.

Criminals adapt fast, and government must do more than keep up. It must get ahead of them. In that spirit, we will continue to improve the sophistication of Canada's criminal response tools to keep Canadians safe.