Ted Falk

[Military Justice System Modernization Act, October 6th, 2025]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for Nanaimo—Ladysmith for an excellent speech. I think she clearly identified some of the issues and concerns she has with this legislation.

Earlier today, we had the Liberals vote against being tough on crime and instead, support their soft-on-crime approach by voting against the jail and not bail motion that Conservatives put forward. The member identified that she does not necessarily have confidence that victims of sexual violence and assault in the military will receive justice in our courts.

Does the member think that because of the Liberals' failure to pass legislation that is effective and brings justice to victims?

[Firearms, October 1st, 2025]

Mr. Speaker, loose lips sink ships. In a stunning display of incompetence, the public safety minister admitted that spending $750 million on a gun grab will not work. The same minister has lost track of 600 foreign national criminals and failed to hire 1,000 additional border guards. Canadians want a government that can keep them safe, but instead of protecting Canadians, the Prime Minister would rather protect the public safety minister and their flawed ideology. The ship is sinking.

Will the Prime Minister fire the Minister of Public Safety?

[Strong Borders Act, September 16th, 2025]

Mr. Speaker, I think the member misrepresented what the bill really does. What the bill really does is expand surveillance and data collection from individuals without requiring a judicial warrant. She said it would require one.

That is not what the bill says. Could she clarify her comments?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Return, September 15th, 2025]

With regard to the Canada Border Services Agency, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada, and the COVID-19 pandemic: (a) how many migrant workers entered Canada between (i) April 1, 2020, and October 31, 2020, (ii) April 1, 2021, and October 31, 2021, (iii) April 1, 2022, and October 31, 2022, broken down by province; (b) what are the details of the quarantine period, including (i) how many migrant workers were quarantined, by province, (ii) when they were quarantined, by month and year, (iii) the length of the quarantine period, (iv) who paid for their quarantine accommodations, (v) the overall cost to the government; (c) how many migrant workers received their COVID-19 vaccine in Canada, upon their arrival in Canada between (i) April 1, 2020, and October 31, 2020, (ii) April 1, 2021, and October 31, 2021, (iii) April 1, 2022, and October 31, 2022, broken down by province; (d) in cases where the migrant worker was already COVID-19 vaccinated in his or her country of origin, did Canadian immigration authorities document the date of vaccination and the vaccine brand for migrant workers, and what is the data; (e) in cases where the migrant worker received an unapproved COVID-19 vaccine brand prior to entry, would they require receipt of a Canadian approved brand upon entry; (f) following COVID-19 immunization, how many migrant workers (i) sought medical attention, (ii) were determined too ill to work, (iii) were hospitalized, (iv) died while in Canada; (g) for each case in (f)(i) to (f)(iv), how many occurrences were there between (i) April 1, 2020, and October 31, 2020, (ii) April 1, 2021, and October 31, 2021, (iii) April 1, 2022, and October 31, 2022, broken down by province; (h) in cases where a migrant worker died following immunization, what were the causes of death; (i) with regard to persons in (h), were any autopsies performed on any deceased migrant workers; (j) if the answer to (i) is affirmative, how many autopsies were performed and what were the findings; (k) how many deceased bodies or their cremated remains were sent back to their country of origin between (i) April 1, 2020, and October 31, 2020, (ii) April 1, 2021, and October 31, 2021, (iii) April 1, 2022, and October 31, 2022; and (l) in cases where a migrant worker had an adverse event following their COVID-19 vaccination in Canada, would they qualify for Canada's Vaccine Injury Support Program?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Return, September 15th, 2025]

With regard to communications between the Minister of Justice, or Attorney General of Canada, or their office, and the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada, or that office, since March 2020: what are the details of all such communication, including, for each, the (i) date, (ii) format, (iii) sender, (iv) recipient, (v) title, (vi) subject matter, (vii) decisions made, if applicable?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Return, September 15th, 2025]

With regard to the Vaccine Injury Support Program: (a) what are the total expenditures to date related to the program, broken down by year since the program was formed; (b) what is the yearly breakdown of expenditures by type of expense, including (i) compensation payments, (ii) overhead, excluding salaries, (iii) lawyers, (iv) salaries, (v) other types of expenditures, broken down by type; and (c) what are the details of all contracts over $5,000 signed in relation to the program, including, for each, the (i) date, (ii) vendor, (iii) value or amount, (iv) description of the goods or services, (v) type of contract (consulting, payments for goods, etc.), (vi) manner in which the contract was awarded (sole-sourced or competitive bid)?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Return, September 15th, 2025]

With regard to expenditures on consulting services by the government in the 2024 calendar year, broken down by department, agency or other government entity: (a) what was the total amount spent on (i) training consultants (code 0446), (ii) information technology and telecommunications consultants (code 0473), (iii) management consulting (code 0491), (iv) other types of consultants or consulting, broken down by type and object code; and (b) for each response in (a), what is the total value of the expenditures that were (i) awarded competitively, (ii) sole-sourced?

[Citizenship Act, September 15th, 2025]

Madam Speaker, I want to thank the member for Calgary Nose Hill for all the tremendous work she has done in Parliament over the years, especially on the piece of legislation before us. She has really shown her expertise in this area and on this file.

The member is absolutely right; our immigration system has been severely broken by the Liberals. They are not taking into consideration the reality we live in Canada and that many things are broken that need to be fixed. Our eyes should be on that.

[Citizenship Act, September 15th, 2025]

Madam Speaker, I have great respect for the member for La Pointe-de-l'Île and for the work he does in Parliament.

The question is very good: Where would Bill C-3 not be fair to someone?

Bill C-3 would extend citizenship to people whose parents have been here only 1,095 days. They themselves may never come here, never want to come here, never contribute to our Canadian society, never be part of our communities and not even necessarily know either of our two official languages, yet they could be full Canadians.

Right now there is a group of people called lost Canadians, who are affected by previous legislation, which the bill also captures, but it could do it with a lot less broadening than in its current state. If the bill is not defeated entirely and something better brought forward, then it needs some significant amendments at committee that would really refine the scope of the bill to include lost Canadians, as is the intent.

[Citizenship Act, September 15th, 2025]

Madam Speaker, the bill is about providing citizenship to multi-generational people who have never lived here, who have no intention of living here and who have never been in Canada. Under the bill, to become a Canadian citizen, a person would not be required to have spent a day in Canada. The parents are required to spend 1,095 days in Canada over their lifetime. However, a person could conceivably, in the bill's current form, receive Canadian citizenship without ever having spent a day in Canada, and they could use their Canadian citizenship for travel purposes, for coming here in the event of a medical emergency, for cheaper education or to take advantage of our social system here, because they would be a Canadian citizen.

The bill is seriously flawed, and the member should actually take notice of that.