Michelle Rempel

[Business of Supply, May 28th, 2026]

Mr. Chair, the law requires that non-citizens convicted of a serious crime be deported, yet the minister refuses to close a loophole that keeps them here.

A temporary foreign worker assaulted a woman then robbed her, yet he was given a lenient sentence to avoid deportation. Can the minister tell the victim why this person is still in Canada?

[Business of Supply, May 28th, 2026]

Mr. Chair, I am glad the minister talked about another justice bill. Bill C-16 renders all mandatory minimum penalties meaningless, which means that this problem of giving sweetheart sentences to non-citizens convicted of serious crimes would only get worse.

Will the minister go to the justice minister and recommend an amendment to Bill C-16 that would not juice this problem of judges giving lenient sentences to non-citizens convicted of serious crimes, like the strangler my colleague just talked about, to ensure that they do not have the privilege of staying in our country and are deported like they should be?

[Business of Supply, May 28th, 2026]

Mr. Chair, that translates to blah, blah, blah, another rapist stays in Canada, blah, blah, blah, another thief stays in Canada, blah, blah, blah, another extortionist stays in Canada.

This is integral to Canadian national identity. They have to respect the rule of law. What the Liberals are saying is that if they commit a serious crime, as guests in our country, they can stay here because the Liberals refuse to close this loophole that is being exploited by a woke judiciary. Will they do the right thing and finally close it?

[Business of Supply, May 28th, 2026]

Mr. Chair, that is just not the case. Every day there is a new headline. For example, this one: “Judge gives lenient sentence so trucker can dodge deportation after fatal Ontario crash”. That is not a consequence. They get to stay in our country. Guests in our country have to abide by the rule of law. The rule of law is part of our national identity.

Can she just say that she will go to the justice minister and say that they are getting roasted on this, and rightly so, and that they need to close this loophole?

[Business of Supply, May 28th, 2026]

Mr. Chair, does the minister realize how inane and uncompassionate she sounds? She says, “Oh, there is nothing in the law that says this.” It says it in the law. My bill would have closed this loophole, and she could have gone to the justice minister and told him to close this loophole. She sat back and said that it was fine. No, the result is what my colleague just said: people being strangled and their abusers staying in Canada.

Why will she not advocate to deport them?

[Business of Supply, May 28th, 2026]

Mr. Chair, inaction speaks louder than words. What my colleague just talked about is a constituent who was strangled by her non-citizen partner and yet he remains in Canada. I believe he is trying to apply for humanitarian and compassionate grounds, and she is living in a women's shelter. It is because the government has done nothing to enforce the law.

Will the minister commit to talking to the justice minister and telling him to close the loophole that allows judges to give sweetheart sentences to allow disgusting, non-citizen criminals like the person my colleague referenced to be deported from Canada?

[Business of Supply, May 28th, 2026]

Mr. Chair, the provinces' social services are being strained by the minister's policy. She is issuing 215,000 new foreign worker permits this year. The asylum system is still out of control. If a province asks clearly for more control over immigration, would the minister commit to advocating for that?

[Business of Supply, May 28th, 2026]

Mr. Chair, does the minister realize that her non-answer, putting it mildly, would be an irritant at a critical time for a certain province?

[Business of Supply, May 28th, 2026]

Mr. Chair, the question, specifically, was this: If a province wants more autonomy over immigration, would the minister be open to granting it?

I will ask the minister this: Does she support the principle that the federal government should grant equal autonomy over immigration powers to all provinces that request it, rather than giving it to one province while denying the same power to others?

[Business of Supply, May 28th, 2026]

Mr. Chair, the Liberals' policy of bringing in too many low-skilled non-citizens too fast meant that public services that provinces maintain, such as social welfare, subsidized housing, health care and primary education, have become strained.

Does the minister support giving the provinces that want it greater control over immigration for the purpose of decreasing immigration to more sustainable levels, prioritizing economic migration and giving their own residents first priority for new job opportunities?