House of Commons Hansard #116 of the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was survivors.
This summary is computer-generated. Usually it’s accurate, but every now and then it’ll contain inaccuracies or total fabrications.
Criminal Code Report stage of Bill S-228. The bill, Bill S-228, seeks to explicitly amend the Criminal Code to define forced and coerced sterilization as aggravated assault. Supporters from all parties argue this legislative clarity is essential to protect bodily autonomy, address systemic discrimination—particularly against Indigenous women—and provide accountability for a practice that remains a modern reality rather than just a historical injustice. 7200 words, 1 hour.
Bill C-11—Time Allocation Motion Members debate the government’s motion to impose time allocation on Bill C-11, which transfers military sexual assault cases to civilian courts. Liberals contend the policy is essential for restoring institutional trust, while opposition members argue closure undermines democratic committee scrutiny. Debate also considers whether survivors should have a choice of jurisdiction. 4600 words, 2 hours.
Military Justice System Modernization Act Report stage of Bill C-11. The bill amends the National Defence Act to transfer sexual misconduct cases within the armed forces to civilian courts. Conservatives and Bloc members, citing recent committee work, argue the legislation should allow survivors to choose which justice system handles their cases. Conversely, Liberals contend that the mandatory transfer is a key recommendation of landmark reports and essential for independence. The opposition heavily criticizes the government for using time allocation to dismiss cross-party amendments. 26000 words, 3 hours in 2 segments: 1 2.
Ministerial Compliance with Order in Council Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay supports a question of privilege regarding the government's failure to table annual reports from the Canadian Ombudsperson for Responsible Enterprise, arguing this impedes parliamentary oversight of human rights abuses involving Canadian companies. 900 words, 10 minutes.
Framework on the Access to and Use of Cash Act First reading of Bill C-276. The bill establishes a national framework protecting access to physical cash and mandates parliamentary approval for the creation or issuance of any central bank digital currency in Canada. 200 words.
The Deputy Speaker Tom Kmiec
The recorded division on the motion stands deferred.
Pursuant to Standing Order 45, the recorded divisions stand further deferred until Tuesday, May 5, at the expiry of the time provided for Oral Questions.
I see the hon. parliamentary secretary for the government House leader rising on a point of order.
Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB
Mr. Speaker, I suspect if you were to canvass the House, you would find unanimous consent to call it 7:12 p.m. so we can get into the late show.
A motion to adjourn the House under Standing Order 38 deemed to have been moved.
Cheryl Gallant Conservative Algonquin—Renfrew—Pembroke, ON
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise on behalf of the answer-seeking Canadians in the riding of Algonquin—Renfrew—Pembroke.
Last week, I asked the government if it would end the corporate welfare spending spree and balance the budget. The response from the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance was a misogynistic personal attack. This has become a recurring talking point from the Liberal bro caucus. The Liberals cannot defend their terrible policy, so they resort to invoking the “hysterical woman” trope.
This sexist pattern comes straight from the top. The Prime Minister does not like to be questioned by women. He gets chippy and condescending when pressed. He even deployed a classic gaslighting technique when he told Rosemary Barton to look inside herself when she asked about his conflicts of interest.
Let us be clear. I am not raising a question of privilege. This is no place for a thin skin. I am happy to throw partisan haymakers, and I can appreciate a sharp, devastating rejoinder. The secretary's ad hominem attack was just blunt and boring. It was less Cicero in the forum and more Archie Bunker in the La-Z-Boy chair.
After 11 years of failure, all the Liberals have left are tired, worn-out personal attacks. This should not be a surprise, considering their policies are just as tired and worn out. The Liberal sovereign debt fund is just repeating the failure of the clean growth fund. The clean growth fund is just repeating the failure of the Canadian Infrastructure Bank. The Infrastructure Bank is just repeating the failure of the supercluster strategy. The supercluster strategy was just the Liberals' doubling down on the failure of the cluster strategy.
The Liberals continue to fail over and over again yet never learn a fundamental lesson: One cannot beat the market. It does not matter if one has a Ph.D. in economics from Oxford. No one is smarter than the collective decision-making of 40 million Canadians.
Unfortunately, while no one person can outsmart the market, someone can outsmart a government. Call this the Enron-Brookfield business model. Rather than compete in the market, they lobby the government to regulate a market into existence and to then regulate out the competition. They do not need a secret cabal to execute this strategy. They just need to put the word “sovereign” before our business pitch and watch the CBC lobby for them. They can rebrand their concrete slab into a sovereign spaceport and wait for the government to give them a 10-year exclusive, sole-source contract.
Unlike the arrogant Liberal approach, our Conservative economic plan is based in humility. We cannot know the future, so we let a thousand flowers bloom. We create the conditions where anyone with a sound business plan has a chance to build a successful venture. We do not pick and choose who gets special political exemptions from Liberal red tape. We will cut the Liberal red tape and lower taxes for everyone equally.
This is the same approach millions of Canadians take to investing. They do not try to pick individual stocks. They purchase exchange-traded funds to buy the market. This agnostic approach to economic growth has proven to be superior to the Liberals' faith-based approach. Unfortunately, Canadians are stuck living in the church of climate socialism for the next three years.
This is a choice Canadians will face next time: our Conservative approach, rooted in reality and humility, or the Liberal approach, based on economic arrogance defensible only through personal insults.
Ryan Turnbull LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance and National Revenue and to the Secretary of State (Canada Revenue Agency and Financial Institutions)
Mr. Speaker, I am really glad to be here this evening to answer the member for Algonquin—Renfrew—Pembroke's question.
While she is very entertaining in her remarks, Canadians know that these are uncertain times and that global volatility is something our government takes seriously. Responsible leadership is really what matters more than ever. Around the world, inflation, conflict and economic volatility are putting pressure on families and governments alike. In response, our government is focused on what we can control, which is managing public finances responsibly while investing where it matters most.
That is exactly what the spring economic update delivers or at least shows progress on. Canada enters this moment from a position of strength. Our economy has proven more resilient than anticipated in the face of global disruption. Inflation remains within the Bank of Canada's target range. Investment and business confidence are recovering after two massive shocks: the oil price shock and the tariff war before it.
The strong fundamentals that we reported on in the spring economic update allow us to make smart, targeted choices without compromising fiscal discipline. Fiscal responsibility means making sure every dollar works harder for Canadians. That is why our government is preserving fiscal sustainability for future generations, keeping debt manageable and maintaining Canada's long-standing fiscal advantage among G7 countries.
The member opposite will note that the IMF has recently said that Canada has the strongest fiscal position in the G7. We had that confirmed by the bank governor today at the finance committee who said the same, that we are the envy of many other countries.
Our government is committed to reducing spending on government operations. We have generated $60 billion in savings over five years to ensure public funds are focused on high-impact priorities rather than administrative costs.
We also have moved forward with a capital budgeting framework so that a greater portion of the investments the government is making can be seen to be revenue-generating and separated out with respect to reporting, in order to understand their impact. We are focused on high-impact priorities, including building more homes, advancing major nation-building projects, strengthening our defence industry and unlocking private investment across the country. We are really seeking to catalyze $1 trillion in investment. We are well on our way. We have seen a lot of commitments to invest in Canada. The UAE has committed $70 billion. Australian investors have committed $10 billion. We have $125 billion for 15 major projects that we will see creating about 60,000 or more jobs across Canada. These are results Canadians can bank on.
We are also seeing some of the results of productivity-boosting deductions that we have offered businesses that are investing in R and D, IP protection, new information technology within their businesses and the like. There are a number of different tax deductions that we have offered, which are allowing businesses to invest in themselves, in turn boosting productivity and the economy.
We are seeing wages double at the pace of inflation. That is a trend that has been continuing to increase year over year for three years now. That is good news for Canadians. I know we all can agree that productivity needs to continue to rise in order to see that standard of living rise as well, which is what Canadians all want to see.
Cheryl Gallant Conservative Algonquin—Renfrew—Pembroke, ON
Mr. Speaker, it is clear from this old Liberal response that the Liberals are incapable of rising to the occasion. They have become a broken record of vapid slogans.
The Liberals are spending more, leaving Canadians to invest less. They are growing the economy from the heart out, the elbows up, the eyes down, but always against the fight for freedom. If one dares to question them, they suggest that person is mentally ill or, like the national “spend more” minister, will accuse them of hating their country. This illustrates the choice Canadians have: They can choose the nationalism of the Liberal Party, which treats criticism as treason, or choose the patriotism of the Conservatives, who seek to repair what is being broken in the country we love. That is the choice.
We choose patriotism over nationalism. We choose humility over arrogance. We choose Canada strong and free.
Ryan Turnbull Liberal Whitby, ON
Mr. Speaker, I am glad the member has adopted the “Canada Strong” message on behalf of the government. I appreciate her finally contributing to a plan that will make our economy stronger.
As I have said, we are moving forward from a position of strength. That gives us the fiscal capacity to do the things that we have proposed to do and that we are actually implementing, including major investments in defence infrastructure and housing, which will be boosting innovation and productivity across the country.
The spring economic update shows very clearly that progress is being made. We have $11 billion less of a deficit and the average yearly increase of government spending has come down from 8% to 2%. Over the next three years, it will come to a 0% increase. We are also seeing lots of change within the economy and the highest foreign direct investment in almost two decades.
The member opposite should understand that those things are really good news for this country and for all Canadians as we build a prosperous Canada.
Tamara Jansen Conservative Cloverdale—Langley City, BC
Mr. Speaker, a country that cannot keep its streets safe is a country that is totally losing control of its future.
What is happening in my community of Surrey and Cloverdale should be a warning to every member of the House. Quiet neighbourhoods are being hit by gunfire. Families are wondering whether they are safe in their own homes, and businesses are being threatened. The rule of law is being challenged in broad daylight. This is not inevitable, but if we do not act with seriousness and resolve, organized crime will continue to test the limits of our justice system and intimidate law-abiding Canadians in their own communities.
Let us begin with what happened just last week. In the residential neighbourhood of Sullivan, shots were fired into a vehicle. One 25-year-old man was killed and another was seriously injured. Investigators have confirmed that it was a targeted act tied to the ongoing B.C. gang conflict. This is a neighbourhood where I door knock regularly. It is the second gang execution there in a month.
What is most troubling is not the violence itself, but the facts around it. In late April, Surrey police confirmed that officers from the gang unit had been reassigned to deal with a surge in extortion. When organized crime required focused and sustained pressure, specialized resources were being pulled in another direction. That should concern everyone. When enforcement is stretched too thin, criminals look for openings. When pressure is not sustained, organized crime adapts. When police are forced to shift limited resources from one serious threat to another, innocent Canadians are the ones left in the crosshairs.
What happened last week was not some isolated gangland shooting in a back alley. It happened in a quiet neighbourhood filled with families, people who had nothing to do with this violence and are now left wondering what could happen next. We need to be clear about what we are dealing with. This is a web of rival gangs and sophisticated organized crime networks increasingly tied to extortion.
The violence is not contained between criminals. It is spilling into our neighbourhoods, our businesses and our streets. When a multi-agency task force was empowered to go after these criminals, there were signs of progress, with more than 30 active investigations, close to 100 judicial authorizations and coordinated action across agencies. Over 100 individuals were being examined for immigration violations linked to those networks.
That is what it looks like when the full weight of the system is applied, but that pressure has to be constant. Organized crime does not disappear because of one announcement or one operation. It has to be confronted every day with sustained enforcement, specialized policing and real consequences.
At the same time, we cannot ignore the pattern of leniency in the system itself. Individuals with serious criminal histories remain in this country when they should have been removed. Offenders breach conditions, reoffend and continue to benefit from delays, reduced sentences or rulings that allow them to stay. Judges have warned of a two-tier justice system, where penalties are softened to avoid deportation while Canadians face the full weight of the law. Even people under deportation orders who are facing serious allegations have been able to exploit the gaps and disappear from oversight or avoid consequences. That is not right. It sends a dangerous message to criminals that the rules are negotiable and the consequences are minimal.
If we want to turn this around, we need sustained support for law enforcement. That means specialized units that remain focused, officers on the ground who are not pulled away at the first shift in priorities, and tools, such as air support, that help police monitor suspects, coordinate responses and stop offenders from operating freely.
Will the government finally stop with the rhetoric, restore mandatory minimums, repeal its catch-and-release laws and ensure that criminals face real consequences?
Ryan Turnbull LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance and National Revenue and to the Secretary of State (Canada Revenue Agency and Financial Institutions)
Mr. Speaker, I welcome the opportunity to rise today to speak about an issue that Canadians are no longer willing to tolerate: the surge of extortion that is targeting our communities, our businesses and our families.
Crime has evolved, and frankly, our laws did not keep pace quickly enough. That is a reality, but unlike the members opposite, we are not interested in pointing fingers and walking away. We are taking responsibility and fixing the issue. This is why we introduced Bill C-14, the bail and sentencing reform act, and Bill C-16, the protecting victims act, two of the most consequential proposed reforms to the Criminal Code in a generation.
Bill C-14 would give tools to provincial judges and police officers to put repeat and violent extortionists in jail, where they belong. It would mandate strict bail conditions for people accused of extortion and organized crime, including weapons prohibitions and geographic restrictions. It would introduce a reverse onus for extortion involving violence, shifting the burden so that the people accused must justify their release instead of the Crown having to justify their detention, and it would ensure that sentences for extortion and arson are served consecutively, because escalating violence deserves escalating consequences, period.
Bill C-16 would go even further by addressing how criminal networks operate. It would create a new stand-alone offence to target people who recruit young people into committing crimes like extortion. These criminals are not just breaking the law; they are grooming young people to do their work for them. We are shutting that pipeline down before more lives are pulled into it.
Here is something Canadians must know. These bills were introduced last fall, last year. Canadians expected urgency, but what they got from the Conservatives is delay, obstruction and political gamesmanship, all while they stood in the House pretending to be tough on crime.
Now the same pattern is repeating itself in the Senate, where a Conservative senator has recently claimed there is no timeline to pass Bill C-14 and bring it back to the House for final stage. This is despite overwhelming support from all 10 premiers, from police chiefs across the country, from frontline officers I have talked to and from business leaders across this country who are dealing with extortion in real time.
Let us be clear: The only thing standing between Canadians and stronger protections right now is Conservative delay. If the member opposite truly cared about victims of extortion, she would use her rhetoric and her actual influence inside her party to make sure these bills get passed. Tonight when she goes home, we hope she will pick up the phone and tell her Conservative colleagues in the Senate to stop blocking these bills, which she has been doing, and urge them to pass Bill C-14 both at committee and at third reading, before this Friday, or she will continue to say one thing here while her colleagues ensure that nothing actually gets done.
The legislation is here. The solution is here. The only question is whether the members opposite will finally stop their obstruction and start standing with Canadians and the victims of extortion.
Tamara Jansen Conservative Cloverdale—Langley City, BC
Mr. Speaker, if the government is serious about restoring safety for Canadians, it has to act with clarity and resolve. This begins with consequences. Serious repeat offenders, particularly those engaged in extortion and organized crime, must face meaningful jail time, not symbolic penalties but sentences that deter and protect. The new Liberal legislation, which would make it criminal to shoot a gun from a moving car, is completely unserious. These criminals already know they are committing a crime.
We also need bail rules that put public safety first, not last, and we need to close the loopholes that allow non-citizens involved in serious criminal activity to manipulate the refugee system and remain in this country when they should not. We need to end the leniency that allows people convicted of serious crimes to avoid removal. We desperately need, at the same time, to work with police, provinces and communities, providing sustainable support to dismantle those networks properly and to restore confidence where it has been lost.
What is the reason the Liberal government does not take this issue seriously?
Ryan Turnbull Liberal Whitby, ON
Mr. Speaker, that is exactly what we have been doing: working with law enforcement and with police associations across the country. We have had tons of testimonials over and over again for these two bills. I have talked to my police association; to my father, who is an ex-homicide detective; and to many other police across this country who have been asking to pass these two bills. In addition, the women's organizations in my region have been asking us to pass the protecting victims act, and they support the work of the government.
Why does the member opposite continue to claim false things in the House, saying we do not care, when we have put the solutions on paper, have done the work in committee and have passed the bills through the House? Conservative senators have been blocking the legislation and trying to slow it down. They have been slowing it down for way too long. Let them get out of the cheap seats and actually do something to help Canadians.
William Stevenson Conservative Yellowhead, AB
Mr. Speaker, over the past year, I have sent various reports and updates to households and businesses across the 35 communities of my beautiful riding. Yellowhead, this last election, has significantly changed boundaries, incorporating areas from five previous ridings. One of the mailers was a tax guide to help individuals, families and businesses to keep more of their hard-earned dollars. Many have found this mailer very helpful. However, hundreds, if not thousands, of my constituents did not receive it due to a lack of coordination between Canada Post, Elections Canada and the House of Commons printing services. I encourage those watching to visit my website and review my monthly updates, but please know that my team and I are actively working with all parties involved to resolve these delivery issues so that they receive the information they expect from their member of Parliament. People have the right to hear from their elected officials. Taxpayers are paying for the service, and it is unacceptable that my constituents are not receiving it.
As the only CPA with public practice experience in the House, every day I hear from law-abiding Canadians and professional accountants. People are struggling to navigate an increasingly complex tax system. Individuals with limited Internet and those lacking computer skills are being discriminated against when dealing with CRA and their access.
A recent report out of British Columbia is deeply concerning. A Canada Revenue Agency employee has been charged after allegedly compromising sensitive tax information and is now facing charges including breach of trust, identity theft and fraud following a multi-year investigation. While honest taxpayers are being burdened, cases like this raise questions. Canadians expect the CRA to protect their sensitive financial information. Instead, we see situations where bad actors within the system are able to access, misuse and abuse the data for years before being caught. Tax fairness is not just about how much people pay. It is about ensuring that the system treats everyone equally. That means going after the wrongdoers while respecting and supporting the millions of Canadians who follow the rules.
In April, in response to my question regarding removal of all gas taxes, the Liberal minister said that “Albertans are looking for the government to provide solutions” and claimed that her government is “delivering”. What is true is that Albertans are looking for change. What is lacking is any proof that the government is actually delivering. Real action would mean scrapping all federal gas and diesel taxes for the rest of the year, not pausing a third of the taxes for a third of the year. That is not delivery; that is a headline. Statistics Canada has confirmed that Canada continues to have the worst food inflation in the G7. Even with the temporary pause of the excise tax, Canadians are still paying nearly 15% more at the pump than Americans, due to the higher taxes and our weaker dollar. Families feel this every day. Higher fuel costs drive up prices across the board, forcing Canadians to choose between filling their tank and filling their grocery cart.
Therefore, I will ask again: If the government knows that energy costs drive everything else, why will it not remove all federal fuel taxes and deliver real relief?
Ryan Turnbull LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance and National Revenue and to the Secretary of State (Canada Revenue Agency and Financial Institutions)
Clearly, Mr. Speaker, Canadians are navigating a rapidly changing, increasingly fragmented and volatile global economy, one that is more complex, more unpredictable and, for many, more costly as well. In response, our government continues to focus on what we can control, which is building a strong Canadian economy and diversifying our trade partners abroad. We see signs of progress, with 20 new trade and security agreements signed and a 36% increase in non-U.S. trade, which is significant. We are also focused on delivering responsible fiscal management and supporting Canadians who are under pressure from everyday expenses.
Just last week, on Friday, I had the opportunity to list 19 different tax cuts that our government has made. There was no response from the Conservatives, of course, because they did not support 99% of them. I think there might have been one they allowed to pass, but I am sure if they could have blocked them, they would have done so, because that is exactly what we see in this House: the Conservatives obstructing and voting against the very things that help Canadians, whether it is child care or a national school food program, a groceries and essentials benefit, an income tax cut, suspending the fuel excise tax, and on and on. Every single measure we put forward that actually helps to tangibly reduce the cost of living pressures on Canadians, they vote against and oppose. I do not know how they can stand up in the House and say they actually care about households and the cost of living.
The other thing the member opposite suggested is that the tax system has become more complex. It is true, as we offer investment tax credits for businesses and waive, or increase deductions for, certain kinds of expenses, or as we help tradespeople who are moving across the country, relocating for work, by allowing them to deduct more of those expenses, that it is more complex for Canadians. However, we have also moved forward with an automatic tax filing system and initiative that will help millions of Canadians who, for the many accessing federal benefits and supports, rely on filing their taxes. We know full well that it will help with simple tax filings. It also means that other Canadians will be able to get access to benefits because it better utilizes government resources to help those with the simplest tax filings to access the tax benefits and federal payments they are eligible for. We are stepping up to help out.
We have fiscal strength. The IMF said recently that we have the strongest fiscal position in the G7 and that we should use our fiscal capacity, which is exactly what the federal government is doing. I know Conservatives would never invest in Canadians. They do not believe in Canadians. They do not believe in boosting the economy.
That is not the Liberal Party's position. Our position is to use our fiscal capacity to boost our economy. We see those investments coming to fruition and manifesting good-paying jobs for generations to come. That is the prosperity we are building. That is how we build Canada strong, and we are not going to back down just because Conservatives talk a good game in this House.
William Stevenson Conservative Yellowhead, AB
Mr. Speaker, three years ago, before the crisis got worse, Conservatives called upon the Liberals to suspend gas taxes for the summer so that Canadians could afford a simple road trip. The Liberals voted no.
Now, after years of inflation, with higher grocery costs and during an international energy crisis, we are calling for a stronger measure: to remove all federal fuel taxes for the rest of the year. Once again, the Liberals refuse to act. Instead, the Prime Minister offered a half measure, cutting a third of the taxes for a third of the year. This might have helped back in 2023, but not now.
Canadians are struggling. The cheapest gas around is reaching two dollars a litre. People cannot afford a government that is constantly behind. When will the government stop pretending to help and actually deliver real relief?
Ryan Turnbull Liberal Whitby, ON
Mr. Speaker, actions speak louder than words, and what we see is that the words of Conservatives in this House do not match how they vote. They do not support any of the measures our government has put forward.
How are they going to vote on the spring economic update? That is what I would like to know. There are 80,000 to 100,000 new skilled trades workers hanging in the balance in terms of support: a $10,000 incentive for a small or medium-sized company to hire an apprentice, $400 a week up to about $16,000 for a new apprentice, plus a completion bonus of $5,000 for 80,000 to 100,000 workers. How are the Conservatives going to vote?
The Conservatives have said in the House that they do not support these investments in the workforce in Canada. How can they not support workers across this country while standing up and saying that they care about families, affordability and industries that are affected by tariffs that the United States has put on us?
How can they not support workers? How are they going to vote?
TaxationAdjournment Proceedings
The Deputy Speaker Tom Kmiec
It being 7:08 p.m., the House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 10 a.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).
(The House adjourned at 7:08 p.m.)