Debates of Feb. 24th, 2026

Notice of Motion

[Rebecca Alty, Liberal, Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 83(1), I would like to table, in both official languages, a notice of ways and means motion for a bill entitled “An Act to give effect to the final Self-Government Agreement for the Tłegǫ́hłı̨ Got’įnę and to make consequential amendments to other Acts”.

Pursuant to Standing Order 83(2), I would like to request that an order of the day be designated for the consideration of this motion.

Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present in both official languages the following two reports of the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities: the third report, entitled “Advancements in Home Building Technologies”, and the fourth report, entitled “Canada Without Barriers by 2040”. They have been submitted electronically to the table.

International Trade

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, Humber River—Black Creek, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the report of the legislative committee on Bill C-18, an act to implement the comprehensive economic partnership agreement between Canada and Indonesia.

The committee has studied the bill, and I am very happy to forward it on to the House. It has decided to report the bill back to the House with amendments.

Finance

[Karina Gould, Liberal, Burlington, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the report of the legislative committee on Bill C-15, an act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on November 4, 2025.

The committee has studied the bill and has decided to report the bill back to the House with amendments.

Pacific Salmon

[Brad Vis, Conservative, Mission—Matsqui—Abbotsford, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I am tabling a petition on behalf of constituents in Mission—Matsqui—Abbotsford who are deeply concerned about proposed changes to the salmon allocation policy, which would decimate recreational fishing opportunities for coho and chinook in British Columbia.

Recreational fishers fully recognize conservation and first nations' constitutionally protected food, social, ceremonial and commercial fisheries. For generations, salmon have been managed by the government as a common property resource held in trust for the benefit of all Canadians. Changing this common property principle risks turning a shared public resource into an exclusive privilege that would reduce access for many Canadians and undermine confidence in fisheries management. Petitioners note that it would be devastating to our tourism economy and the millions of dollars that flow into conservation efforts. Constituents are calling on the Minister of Fisheries to leave current salmon allocation policies alone and uphold the cultural rights and traditions of all British Columbians.

[Todd Doherty, Conservative, Cariboo—Prince George, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today with a petition signed by the residents of my riding and many British Columbians.

Salmon is a critical resource for not only our province of British Columbia and our region, but also our first nations and non-first nations. The petition is signed by citizens and permanent residents of Canada who are calling upon the Government of Canada to keep the common property resource principle in the revised salmon allocation policy so that salmon remain a publicly managed resource, federal stewardship stays transparent and conservation-focused, and no single group is given exclusive control over access.

It is important to note that we must have fish for today, fish for tomorrow and fish for the future.

Water

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise to present a petition today on behalf of residents from within Saanich—Gulf Islands and, increasingly, from across the country, I should add, who are concerned with the state of Canada's waterways and watersheds.

Petitioners recognize that riding alongside the climate crisis comes a water crisis. They call on the Government of Canada and the House of Commons to update Canada's water laws to ensure that no industry or corporation would take precedence over the health of Canada's waterways and watersheds. Of course, our water is essential for human health. They call for Canada's water laws to be updated with the guidance of professionals and specialists in the field of water conservation.

Public Safety

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Riding Mountain, MB]

Mr. Speaker, it is always a pleasure to petition on behalf of the people of Riding Mountain. I rise for the sixth time on behalf of the people of Dauphin, Manitoba, to present a petition on the rising rate of crime. Residents of Dauphin and the Parkland region are demanding that the Liberal government repeal its soft-on crime policies, which have fuelled a surge in crime throughout their communities. Since 2015, there has been a 54% increase in violent crime and a 75% increase in sexual assaults across Canada. Petitioners are deeply concerned by what they have read in their local papers, which included a report last month that the Dauphin RCMP arrested three men in connection to a crime spree of multiple incidents, including theft and armed robbery, all in a single day.

Our once safe communities have now turned into places where people fear for their lives because the government's catch-and-release policies have allowed violent repeat offenders to be out on bail instead of in jail. The people of Dauphin and the Parkland region demand that the Liberal government repeal its soft-on crime policies, which directly threaten their livelihoods and their community. I fully support the good people of Dauphin.

World Health Organization

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Algonquin—Renfrew—Pembroke, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to present a petition signed by the freedom-loving Canadians from my riding of Algonquin—Renfrew—Pembroke. They are concerned with the Liberal government's decision to sign Canada onto the WHO's pandemic agreement, which was agreed upon last May, right after Canadians had voted in the last election. This legally binding treaty will give unprecedented powers over the authority and laws passed by our Parliament and elected Canadians to unaccountable, unelected UN bureaucrats controlled by the Communist Chinese. The health-conscious petitioners are calling on the Government of Canada to immediately and unilaterally withdraw from the WHO's pandemic treaty.

Registered Disability Savings Plan

[Karina Gould, Liberal, Burlington, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to present two petitions on behalf of my constituents. The first was started in Burlington. It is an e-petition that is calling on the government to increase the lifetime contribution for the registered disability savings plan. My constituents and petitioners note that only 35% of eligible Canadians contribute to an RDSP, and they are calling on the government to increase the lifetime contribution from $200,000 to $300,000. This would ensure that folks would be able to take care of themselves and that families could provide for their children and dependents for the long run.

The Environment

[Karina Gould, Liberal, Burlington, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the second petition is also coming from Burlington and it calls on the government to increase and modernize methane regulations.

Pensions

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to present a petition signed by Canadian military and RCMP veterans who are calling on the Government of Canada to eliminate the so-called marriage after 60 clause, a discriminatory provision of the Canadian Forces Superannuation Act that denies survivor pension benefits to spouses and partners of military and RCMP veterans who marry after the age of 60.

This outdated policy punishes these veterans for finding love and companionship later in life and forces some to choose between financial security and their partners' future well-being. These veterans have served our country with honour, and they and their loved ones deserve to be treated with fairness and dignity. I am proud today to present this petition and to stand with the petitioners in supporting their call for the government to eliminate this unjust clause and ensure that surviving spouses and partners receive the pension benefits they deserve and should be entitled to.

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 at this time.

[The Speaker, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Is it agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Speaker, Francis Scarpaleggia]

[For text of questions and responses, see Written Questions website]

Opposition Motion—Interim Federal Health Program

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

moved:

That, given that,

(i) the cost of the Interim Federal Health Program (IFHP) has more than quadrupled in the last four years, from $211 million to $896 million,

(ii) the cost of the IFHP is projected to rise to $1.5 billion by 2029-2030,

(iii) the IFHP provides non-citizens with failed asylum claims access to benefits that Canadian citizens do not have free access to, including vision care,

(iv) Canadians that have paid into the healthcare system their whole lives are unable to get the healthcare they deserve in part because resources are going to false asylum claimants,

the House call on the government to:

(a) review federal benefits provided to asylum claimants in order to find savings for taxpayers;

(b) restrict federal benefits received by rejected asylum claimants to emergency lifesaving healthcare only;

(c) provide transparency on federal spending on the IFHP by providing an annual report to Parliament, particularly regarding supplementary benefits which Canadian citizens do not have access to; and

(d) pass policies to immediately expel foreign nationals convicted of serious crime in Canada.

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time today with the wonderful, hard-working member for Riding Mountain.

Under the Liberal government, we have seen a dramatic drop in public support for immigration in Canada. Before the Liberal government, Canada's immigration system welcomed people who came to Canada to work hard and to contribute. It protected the world's most vulnerable people, but the Liberals' decision to bring too many people into Canada too fast changed all of that. Canada's crumbling immigration consensus can be attributed to another Liberal failure.

To keep the system fair for everyone, we must end two-tiered Liberal policies that reward non-citizens with no legal reason to be in Canada at the expense of Canadian citizens and legitimate refugees. For example, the law is clear that Canada must deport non-citizens convicted of serious crimes. However, the Liberals have allowed judges to sidestep the intent of that law, handing down lighter sentences precisely to help non-citizen criminals avoid deportation. This makes our streets less safe for everyone.

Failed asylum claimants, people who have made refugee claims but who have had their claims invalidated through Canadian due process, are now given access to better health care, such as vision care and physiotherapy, than Canadians. All anyone has to do is go into one of our ERs to see first-hand that Canada's health care system is crumbling. More than 100,000 Canadians have died waiting for care since 2018, which directly corresponds to the explosion of the cost of the interim federal health program.

To restore order and fairness, the government must end both of these practices. That is why today, Conservatives are delivering constructive policy options and calling upon the government to do the following: ensure that when foreign nationals are convicted of serious crimes in Canada, our policies and practices ensure that they leave, and restrict federal benefits received by rejected asylum claimants to emergency life-saving health care only. These are common-sense measures that are needed to restore order and fairness to Canada's immigration and health care systems and to keep Canada working for everyone.

In my speech today, I want to debunk some of the spin that the Liberals are using to defend some of these failures. I want to start with health care benefits for failed asylum claimants.

For starters, under the Liberals, the interim federal health program, the program that provides benefits to asylum claimants, has morphed well beyond its initial intent, which was to provide care to a small number of legitimate refugees who were fleeing to Canada from war zones. Today, it is a massive boondoggle that provides care to many bogus asylum claimants. The cost of this program has ballooned too. Conservatives uncovered that under the Liberals, the overall cost of the interim federal health program has skyrocketed by over 1,000%, from $66 million to nearly $900 million a year, and it is projected to reach $1.5 billion a year in very short order.

In fact, the Liberals have mismanaged the program so badly that they did not give the data to the Parliamentary Budget Officer on costs broken down by category. Right now, Liberals on the health committee are currently filibustering a motion that would ensure that the government provides the PBO with this data. That is because, contrary to Liberal claims, Canada's asylum backlog has gotten much worse and is still getting worse.

The backlog hit a record 300,000 cases in December 2025 and massive numbers of people in that backlog will be found to have made bogus claims. This is no accident. It results directly from Liberal failures like lifting visa requirements on countries like Mexico with no safeguards to prevent bogus claims, and refusing to tighten border laws to stop illegal crossings and fraudulent asylum applications.

Further, Conservative Order Paper Question No. 556 asked how many failed asylum claimants have remained in Canada since 2020 alone. To give members a sense of the scope of the problem of the government giving health benefits to failed asylum claimants, the data in this Order Paper question showed that by adding up the refugee protection division and refugee appeal division's decisions, 86% of rejected claimants remain in Canada, somewhere in the neighbourhood of 90,000 people.

That aligns with recent government data showing that of at least 500,000 undocumented individuals in Canada, plus around two million people on expired or soon-to-expire work and other temporary permits, and thousands of failed asylum claimants, the Liberals only removed about 22,000 people last year. Millions of people minus 22,000 is still millions.

The government lacks both the operational capacity and the political will to accelerate deportations of non-citizens with no legal right to remain, so instead of removing them from Canada, as the law requires it to do, it is providing better access to health care to failed asylum claimants than to Canadians. That is not right. It is unfair to everyone. At a time when six million Canadians cannot find a family doctor, wait times to see a specialist have hit nearly 30 weeks and nearly 24,000 Canadians died on wait-lists in 2024-25, not a single person without a legal reason to be in Canada should receive better health care than Canadian citizens do.

Rejected asylum claimants should be removed from Canada instead. During the time they are awaiting removal, as we know it takes a long time under the Liberal government, their health benefits should be restricted to emergency life-saving care only. Failed asylum claimants would still have access to life-saving emergency care under the measures in our motion, but gone would be their access to receive benefits that Canadians are not eligible to receive. This would also serve to reduce the demand from non-citizens, who are essentially incentivized to abuse the system, and ensure that Canadians who pay into the system are prioritized.

Unfortunately, rather than ending the practice of giving failed asylum claimants better health care benefits than Canadians, the Liberals are now proposing to set up a costly bureaucracy that would still force Canadian taxpayers to foot the bill for 70% of the premium health care costs that failed asylum claimants incur. In fact, they have gotten things so backwards that they are, as a report stated this morning, cutting integration support for legitimate refugees who want to contribute and be a part of our country while giving premium health care benefits to failed asylum claimants. That is bananas.

Instead, the Liberals should support our motion, restore fairness and restrict the health benefits that failed asylum claimants can receive to emergency life-saving care only. Our proposal to restrict failed asylum claimants' health benefits to emergency life-saving care aligns with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and our Constitution. Given the rapidly ballooning costs of the interim federal health program, it responds to pressing and substantive policy concerns.

The 2012 changes to the interim federal health program were struck down primarily because they created tiers based on country of origin. Our motion today would apply to all failed asylum claimants. The 2012 Federal Court of Appeal ruling explicitly rejected the argument that immigration status alone triggers protected equality rights, affirming that distinctions between citizens and non-citizens are often permissible. Our policy aligns with that ruling by applying equally to all failed applicants. Moreover, the Federal Court of Appeal overturned any notion of a section 12 violation in the 2012 case. The trial court also dismissed section 7 arguments, confirming the charter imposes no positive obligation to fund comprehensive health care for non-citizens.

The Liberals have also claimed that non-citizens convicted of serious crimes do not get more lenient sentences in order to help them avoid deportation. That too is a lie. Almost every week, another high-profile incident comes to light of a non-citizen convicted of serious crimes getting a lenient sentence and avoiding deportation. In the last three months alone, we have seen stories that included a man convicted of possession of child pornography, who knew it was a crime when he watched it, given leniency as the judge gave him six months less a day and explicitly stated that it was to avoid immigration consequences.

This practice is perpetuating a two-tier justice system in Canada where non-citizens are treated differently than Canadian citizens. That is wrong. It is a violation of the spirit of the law that has upheld Canada's immigration consensus for years. Having a two-tier justice system for non-citizens convicted of a serious crime and a two-tiered health care system for failed asylum claimants is unfair and needs to stop.

We need to get back to order and fairness in Canada's immigration system, as well as in our health care system. The motion today is a common-sense constructive proposal to get back on track. If the Liberals are serious about restoring order and fairness, they are going to have to support it. I encourage all parties in the House today to support this proposal.

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

Madam Speaker, I wonder if my hon. friend from Calgary Nose Hill, as a proud Albertan, has thoughts on the premier's recent proposal around immigration as a referendum for Albertans since it touches on today's question. I am baffled by the fact that she is encouraging more people to move to Alberta, with Alberta complaining the federal Liberals are not doing enough to get immigrants to Alberta. If she has thoughts on this as a proud Canadian and Albertan, I would be grateful.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Madam Speaker, the member opposite who asked that question supported Liberal policies that put an undue burden on provincial governments.

When the Liberals brought in too many people too fast for housing, health care and jobs to keep up, what happened was that the provinces ended up shouldering the burden for a lot of the social costs of that program. In fact, my colleague who sits on the health committee, who is about to speak, actually asked the immigration minister if she had even bothered to consult the provinces on the cost of health care related to their mass immigration numbers, and the answer was no.

Of course, because the Liberal government has not enacted common-sense proposals like this one, the provinces are going to start coming up with solutions on their own. This is really about the need for the Liberal government to adopt proposals like ours, which are constructive and designed to restore order and fairness to Canada's immigration system.

[Todd Doherty, Conservative, Cariboo—Prince George, BC]

Madam Speaker, nowhere is this felt more impactfully than in our rural and remote communities. Over six million Canadians are without doctors. In our province of British Columbia, we have emergency room closures. We have OB/GYN teams that are absolutely abandoning our communities, and pregnant women are forced to go great distances to get help.

Almost $1 billion has been spent on illegal immigrants and such. That money could be spent to do incredible work in our rural and remote communities, as well as on my file of recovery centres for those facing mental health issues and addictions. Could our colleague comment on that?

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Madam Speaker, the Liberals brought too many people in too fast for health care to keep up. When we look at the delta between federal government spending on health care and the number of people that came in, it does not match. That was validated by the fact that the immigration minister said that she did not consult provinces on the cost of health care.

Our proposal today is step number one: Failed asylum claimants should not get premium health care compared to what Canadians get. They should have access to life-saving care only. Then, as the law says, they should leave Canada. There should not be any costly bureaucracies set up. We have to get back to focusing on Canadians and those who pay into Canada's health care system.

[Mario Beaulieu, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

Madam Speaker, the problem we are facing is largely caused by the skyrocketing number of asylum seekers and the unacceptable processing times for asylum claims. There are countries that have managed to reduce processing times, like France, where a claim takes less than six months to process, and Germany, where it takes less than eight months.

Should we not start by really focusing our efforts on putting as much pressure as possible on the government to reduce processing times for asylum claims?

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Madam Speaker, first, we have seen that the government's efforts to “expedite” asylum claimants means rubber-stamping applicants from hostile nations like North Korea and Afghanistan without an in-person interview. That is not acceptable.

Second, the province of Quebec has seen an inordinate explosion of asylum claimants, many of them false, because the government has still not put in place more tightened restrictions to prevent illegal border crossings.

Third, this measure today will also reduce the incentives for people to continue to abuse the system. If people know that their asylum claim will be rejected and they will not receive premium health benefits, fewer people will be inclined to continue to abuse the system. That is why this measure is needed, particularly for the province of Quebec.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Riding Mountain, MB]

Madam Speaker, let us talk about a two-tiered health care system, not the fictional version that the Liberals and the NDP dust off every election to scare Canadians but a real one that actually exists. There is a two-tiered health care system in Canada today, but it is one that the left-wing politicians suddenly refuse to touch. This two-tiered system has a name; it is called the interim federal health program. This program was originally created to ensure that refugees fleeing genuine persecution had temporary health care while they transitioned into our provincial health care systems. Now it is being exploited by bogus asylum claimants.

Most Canadians know what the public health care system covers: doctors, hospitals and medically necessary care. That is what the Canada Health Act guarantees, and that is what Canadians are proud of. However, Canadians also know what it does not cover; it does not cover premium benefits like vision care, physiotherapy, counselling, assistive devices, occupational therapy and home care.

In 2016, the Liberals expanded the program to give supplemental health benefits to asylum seekers. According to the government, supplemental health benefits under the interim federal health program include vision care, counselling, assistive devices, home visits, nursing homes, transportation, physiotherapy, occupational therapy, speech therapy and interpretation services. Those are the government's words, not mine. These are not basic emergency services; they are deluxe health benefits that millions of Canadians pay for out of pocket or earn through their workplace.

However, that is not the most troubling part of the program. There is a group of people receiving these benefits that the government has tried to hide from Canadians. I am going to read from the government's own eligibility page for the interim federal health program. This is publicly available for anyone willing to look at it. Under the heading “Refugee claimants”, it states, in the government's words, that coverage is provided if “your claim for refugee protection has been rejected by the [Immigration and Refugee Board]”. It says “rejected”, not “pending” and not “under review”.

The Immigration and Refugee Board, the very body the government created to make these determinations, reviewed a claim and said no. A legal body made a legal determination, and the Liberal government's response to that rejection is to keep those individuals enrolled in the program with full benefits, including the deluxe supplemental health benefits that Canadians are not entitled to. How long does this continue? The government's own website answers that too. In its words, it says that coverage remains in place until “you leave Canada.” Why would anyone in that position choose to leave Canada?

Let me be absolutely clear. Conservatives support providing emergency and life-saving care to anyone in this country, including someone whose claim has been rejected. That is a basic humanitarian principle, and we stand by it, but it is not what the program does for rejected claimants. It does not restrict them to emergency care; it keeps them enrolled in a full program, including every supplemental benefit I have described, for as long as they remain in Canada. Vision care, physiotherapy, occupational therapy, home care and speech therapy are all fully covered for people who the refugee board has already said should not be here.

Because the government has allowed a historic backlog to paralyze the immigration system, with claims taking years to process, the number of people in the program is staggering. The Parliamentary Budget Officer projects there will be over 680,000 people who are eligible beneficiaries by 2030. Because of the Conservative-led investigation at the health committee, the Parliamentary Budget Officer also revealed that the interim federal health program will cost Canadians over $1.5 billion by the year 2030.

To put it in perspective, that is up from approximately $66 million from a decade ago. In under a decade, the program described as limited and temporary has grown by more than 1,000%. It is $1.5 billion every year for a program called interim. That is the word I keep returning to: “interim”, which means temporary. As I said earlier, the program was designed to be a bridge for genuine refugees who needed care but were not covered under the provincial insurance plans.

When a program costs $80 million a year and serves a defined, time-limited purpose, it is reasonable to call it interim. When it costs over $1.5 billion a year, is growing every single year and has no ceiling and no off-ramp, it is not interim anymore; it is a permanent, expanding entitlement that is being exploited by the people it was not designed to help. It costs $1.5 billion every year, there is a backlog stretching years, and Canadians are waiting behind all of it.

Think about what this means for the Canadian family. Think about a mother in this country who has been waiting months to see a specialist. Her doctor referred her, but she is still waiting in a system that is already stretched beyond its limits. Genuine refugees are also on the wait-lists, seeking the care they deserve. They are playing by the rules, but ahead of all those Canadians and genuine refugees on that wait-list are bogus asylum claimants, people whose claim the refugee board has already reviewed and rejected. Think about that. Six million Canadians do not have a family doctor right now. The average wait time to see a specialist is around 30 weeks, and over 100,000 Canadians have died since 2018 while waiting for care.

When rejected fraudulent asylum claimants are on the wait list, they add to the backlog and reduce timely care for Canadians and genuine refugees. It is not only the bogus asylum claimants who are exploiting the program; reports suggest that the medical community may be exploiting it as well. The health committee heard testimony from doctors that physicians are billing the interim federal health program up to five times the rate they charge for Canadian patients, with little oversight, if any. According to the program's fee guide, there are no maximum billing limits for many services under the program.

Canada is a generous country. We always have been. We welcome people who are fleeing genuine persecution, and we should. Conservatives believe in immigration and health care systems that are compassionate and fair, but fair means something. Fair means that the nurse in Winnipeg should not have to pick up an extra shift to pay for her glasses, while the federal government hands that same benefit for free to someone who had their fraudulent claim rejected by the refugee board and has not left.

Fair means that the mother trying to get her son the care he needs should not be on a wait-list behind the people whose legal right to be in this country has been denied. Fair means that when the Parliamentary Budget Officer reports that this program will cost Canadians over $1.5 billion a year with no accountability, the government has an obligation to act.

Here is what the Conservatives are proposing: When the Immigration and Refugee Board rejects a claim, health coverage must be restricted to emergency and life-saving care only. The government should also review all the benefits provided by the program to restore fairness to the people who fund the health care system.

The Liberals and left-wing politicians spent decades warning Canadians about a two-tiered health care system, but they have built a two-tiered system. It is called the interim federal health program. It is a program that bogus asylum claimants exploit at the expense of Canadians and genuine refugees. It is time to restore this program to support the people it was designed to serve.

[Doug Eyolfson, Liberal, Winnipeg West, MB]

Madam Speaker, there is much talk of the phrases “bogus asylum seekers” and “fraudulent asylum seekers”. How does the hon. member respond to findings from the Immigration and Refugee Board that, at most, only a couple of dozen applications a year are actually found to be fraud?