Tamara Jansen

[Spring Economic Update 2026 Implementation Act, May 25th, 2026]

Mr. Speaker, when the government forces Parliament to shut down debate, Canadians should ask themselves one very simple question: What exactly are the Liberals hoping that Canadians will not notice? The choice to use time allocation is the latest in the government's attempt to shortcut transparency. Debate is cut short, scrutiny is treated like obstruction and billions of taxpayer dollars are pushed through Parliament without good oversight. It is becoming a pattern. They change the rules halfway through the game, dim the lights and hope Canadians cannot see the scoreboard clearly enough to question the result.

However, a strong economy depends on trust, trust that the rules are fair, the books are honest and hard work still gets people ahead. Under the Liberal government, Canadians feel like they are in a nightmare game, expected to play blindfolded. Eventually, players stop taking risks, investors stop investing and builders stop building.

My question is simple. Why do the Liberals keep shutting off the cameras and using technicalities like time allocation when the trust of Canadians is at its lowest? Honesty and integrity—

[Spring Economic Update 2026 Implementation Act, May 6th, 2026]

Mr. Speaker, a recent study by the Montreal Economic Institute estimates that the government's buy Canada policy could drive up costs by more than $12 billion a year. During an affordability crisis, does my colleague think paying much higher prices for Liberal vanity projects like Alto rail is the best way to help Canadians keep more of their hard-earned dollars in their pockets?

[Business of Supply, May 5th, 2026]

Mr. Speaker, 2.6 million Canadian jobs depend on getting those tariffs resolved, and a year in, there is still no deal, no timeline and no negotiation. The Prime Minister cannot even decide if our relationship with the U.S. is broken or stronger than ever.

When will the government stop the mixed messages and start real negotiations to remove these tariffs?

[Business of Supply, May 5th, 2026]

Mr. Speaker, we all agree that U.S. tariffs are hurting Canadian workers. Businesses are being squeezed and uncertainty is growing, but loans are not a solution. Even industry leaders are clearly saying that the tariff is the problem.

I would ask my colleague from the Bloc, if tariffs are the problem, does he agree that Canada needs real leverage, like building our energy resource capacity, to get those tariffs removed?

[Justice, May 4th, 2026]

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?

[Justice, May 4th, 2026]

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?

[Finance, May 4th, 2026]

Mr. Speaker, the Parliamentary Budget Officer released four reports on the Liberals' costly credit card budget this morning, and the picture they painted, in our briefing with Annette Ryan, was deeply concerning.

Here is what she confirmed. We still do not have clear definitions of what counts as capital versus operating spending, so she cannot verify whether the government is meeting its own fiscal anchors. The trillion‑dollar investment plan still has no timeline, no performance metrics and no real reporting. The housing plan will not meet targets. The defence plan is a massive unfunded risk. The tens of billions in new spending has no clear governance, no updated costing and no transparency on delivery. The money for the $25‑billion sovereign debt fund will be coming from the Bank of Canada issuing bonds to finance it. Who is buying our debt? An IMF report in April flagged that volatile foreign hedge funds now make up a large share of investors, which puts Canada at serious risk.

This morning's briefing was alarming, to say the least. When will the Prime Minister get serious, stop the credit-card budgeting and let Canadians—

[Canadian Space Launch Act, April 28th, 2026]

Mr. Speaker, the new Liberal space bill reads like yet another one-sided deal. Taxpayers would cover the risk, while Liberal friends and wealthy private investors would collect the reward. If launches fail, Canada pays. If they succeed, the profits are privatized.

Why is the government proposing building a space program where the public carries the liability but the benefits are reserved for a select few?

[Canadian Space Launch Act, April 28th, 2026]

Mr. Speaker, when Canadians hear “space launches”, they think of rockets and satellites, but what they should really be thinking about is security, who is launching, what they are launching and who is behind it. This where the bill falls short. There is no clear national security test written into law. Instead, we are told to trust the ministers. They will figure it out later, behind closed doors.

This is an object being launched into orbit over Canadian territory, over our Arctic and over our infrastructure in our communities. Why is the government asking Canadians to trust discretion, instead of putting clear and enforceable security laws into rules that would guarantee that foreign adversaries cannot exploit Canada's space sector?

[Canadian Space Launch Act, April 28th, 2026]

Mr. Speaker, I could not help but notice earlier when one of my Liberal colleagues shouted the famous Buzz Lightyear line, "To infinity and beyond” in response to today's space bill.

That seems to be the level of seriousness this Liberal government has when it comes to such an important issue. This sort of trivialization raises a serious question. When Canadians see this kind of attitude, they wonder whether our legislation is being approached with the rigour it deserves.

Why are we seeing, in this bill, a shift away from disciplined, rules-based decision-making toward something far more secretive and heavy-handed under this Liberal government?