Public Safety  Mr. Speaker, that member knows and should know that the bail reform bill, which the member actually voted in favour of, tackles serious violent repeat offenders, which include those who use serious violence in committing an auto theft. What the member should also realize is that when the very bill he impugned, Bill C-75, was before this chamber in the 42nd Parliament, we promoted an augmentation, an increase in the penalty available for auto theft.

The Budget  Mr. Speaker, with this budget, we want to help people with housing by creating a larger supply of housing units, whether it be apartments or houses, by providing them with the support they need to defend their rights as tenants, for example, but also by providing financial support.

The Budget  Mr. Speaker, I would politely and respectfully submit that it is a priority for our government. I have been hearing the very same concern expressed to me by a series of indigenous interveners and stakeholders from around the country. I would say this to the member: In Manitoba, we have a working example, with MKO.

The Budget  Mr. Speaker, I would say that I think our commitment to mental health is replete. In the past 12 to 18 months, members have seen us launch a 988 helpline that deals with suicide. Members have seen an entire new Canada health accord, reaching almost $200 billion, with a dedicated pillar addressing mental health and mental health needs.

The Budget  Mr. Speaker, I rise today to address budget 2024. I propose to deliver my remarks in two contexts: first, to address how this budget resonates with the residents whom I am privileged to represent in Parkdale—High Park in Toronto; second, to look more largely at some of the very important components that relate to the administration of justice in this country and are touched on in this budget document.

Justice  Mr. Speaker, the bill that the Conservative Party loves to discuss in this context includes things such as increased penalties for auto theft, a key criminality issue that is seizing Canadians right now. It is an issue we all need to address. I find it a bit disturbing and hypocritical that the member and all his colleagues voted against that bill at the time, which would have helped to augment the crimes of people who steal automobiles.

Public Safety  Mr. Speaker, there are two things I would like to point out. First of all, as soon as Bill C‑75 was introduced in the House two Parliaments ago, the member opposite voted against it, even though it included longer sentences for auto theft. Now we have a budget. In the budget, we have already announced that we are going to increase the maximum sentences for auto theft.

Public Safety  Mr. Speaker, just to make things very clear for this member's constituents, when Bill C‑75 was before the House, we proposed that the sentence for auto theft be increased from 18 months to two years. This member and all of his colleagues voted against that. We are not just going to change the Criminal Code in this budget.

Justice  Mr. Speaker, our resolve to ensure communities are safe is strong. What we did over the past 18 months was that we enacted legislation that addresses the acute causes of crime. What we have done in the past 18 months was ensure that the bail reform system deals with violent, serious offenders.

Justice  Mr. Speaker, I would point out to the member opposite and other members in the chamber that we passed significant bail reform legislation in this chamber with the co-operation of premiers around the country and law enforcement officials around the country. I would also point out to the member opposite that I share her concern about organized criminality.

Justice  Mr. Speaker, let us be clear. This is about a group of Quebeckers who went to court to defend their rights under the Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. If Quebec appeals before the Supreme Court of Canada, we will be there, as we have mentioned several times over the past year, to intervene and participate in these important discussions pertaining to the Canadian charter and the Quebec charter.

Justice  Mr. Speaker, we are firmly committed to participating in these important national discussions that have a major impact on all Canadians, discussions about issues affecting our Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms. As we have said many times, we have serious concerns about the pre-emptive usage of the notwithstanding clause in section 33 of the charter.

Justice  Mr. Speaker, in the context of Bill 21, as I mentioned, and I will say it again, when this decision is made by the Supreme Court, if the appeal goes that far, we will be there. The Government of Canada will always be there to protect the people of Canada and their rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Justice  Mr. Speaker, my answer is the same answer I have given here in the House before. It is the same as the Prime Minister's answer. If Bill 21 reaches the Supreme Court, we will be there, as the Government of Canada, to defend the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. That said, freedom of speech, freedom of equality and gender equality are important issues.

Justice  Mr. Speaker, as I have mentioned on several occasions, and as the Prime Minister himself has already mentioned, when Bill 21 goes to the Supreme Court, if it goes there, we will be there to intervene to defend the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and to defend rights like freedom of expression, the right to equality and freedom of religion.