Bill C-12

Strengthening Canada's Immigration System and Borders Act

An Act respecting certain measures relating to the security of Canada's borders and the integrity of the Canadian immigration system and respecting other related security measures

Part 1 amends the Customs Act to provide the Canada Border Services Agency with facilities free of charge for carrying out any purpose related to the administration or enforcement of that Act and other Acts of Parliament and to provide officers of that Agency with access at certain locations to goods destined for export. It also includes transitional provisions.
Part 2 amends the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act to create a new temporary accelerated scheduling pathway that allows the Minister of Health to add precursor chemicals to Schedule V to that Act. It also makes related amendments to the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (Police Enforcement) Regulations and the Precursor Control Regulations .
Part 3 amends the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act and the Cannabis Act to confirm that the Governor in Council may, on the recommendation of the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, make regulations exempting members of law enforcement from the application of any provision of the Criminal Code that creates drug-related inchoate offences when they are undertaking lawful investigations.
Part 4 amends the Oceans Act to provide that coast guard services include activities related to security and to authorize the responsible minister to collect, analyze and disclose information and intelligence.
Part 5 amends the Department of Citizenship and Immigration Act to authorize the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration to disclose, for certain purposes and subject to any regulations, personal information under the control of the Department within the Department and to certain other federal and provincial government entities.
It also amends the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act to authorize the making of regulations relating to the disclosure of information collected for the purposes of that Act to federal departments and agencies.
Part 6 amends the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act to, among other things,
(a) eliminate the designated countries of origin regime;
(b) authorize the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration to specify the information and documents that are required in support of a claim for refugee protection;
(c) authorize the Refugee Protection Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board to determine that claims for refugee protection that have not yet been referred to the Refugee Protection Division have been abandoned in certain circumstances;
(d) provide the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration with the power to determine that claims for refugee protection that have not yet been referred to the Refugee Protection Division have been withdrawn in certain circumstances;
(e) require the Refugee Protection Division and the Refugee Appeal Division to suspend certain proceedings respecting a claim for refugee protection if the claimant is not present in Canada;
(f) clarify that decisions of the Immigration and Refugee Board must be rendered, and reasons for those decisions must be given, in the manner specified by its Chairperson; and
(g) authorize regulations to be made setting out the circumstances in which the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration or the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness must designate, in relation to certain proceedings or applications, a representative for persons who are under 18 years of age or who are unable to appreciate the nature of the proceeding or application.
It also includes transitional provisions.
Part 7 amends the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act to, among other things,
(a) authorize the Governor in Council to make an order specifying that certain applications made under that Act are not to be accepted for processing, or that the processing of those applications is to be suspended or terminated, when the Governor in Council is of the opinion that it is in the public interest to do so;
(b) authorize the Governor in Council to make an order to cancel, suspend or vary certain documents issued under that Act, or to impose or vary conditions, when the Governor in Council is of the opinion that it is in the public interest to do so;
(c) for the application of an order referred to in paragraph (b), require a person to appear for an examination, answer questions truthfully and produce all relevant documents or evidence that an officer requires; and
(d) authorize the Governor in Council to make regulations prescribing circumstances in which a document issued under that Act can be cancelled, suspended or varied, and in which officers may terminate the processing of certain applications made under that Act.
Part 8 amends the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act to add two new grounds of ineligibility for claims for refugee protection as well as powers to make regulations respecting exceptions to those new grounds. It also includes a transitional provision respecting the retroactive application of those new grounds.
Part 9 amends the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act to, among other things,
(a) increase the maximum administrative monetary penalties that may be imposed for certain violations and the maximum punishments that may be imposed for certain criminal offences under that Act;
(b) replace the existing optional compliance agreement regime with a new mandatory compliance agreement regime that, among other things,
(i) requires every person or entity that receives an administrative monetary penalty for a prescribed violation to enter into a compliance agreement with the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada (the Centre),
(ii) requires the Director of the Centre to make a compliance order if the person or entity refuses to enter into a compliance agreement or fails to comply with such an agreement, and
(iii) designates the contravention of a compliance order as a new violation under that Act;
(c) require persons or entities referred to in section 5 of that Act, other than those already required to register, to enroll with the Centre; and
(d) authorize the Centre to disclose certain information to the Commissioner of Canada Elections, subject to certain conditions.
It also makes consequential and related amendments to the Retail Payment Activities Act and the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Administrative Monetary Penalties Regulations and includes transitional provisions.
Part 10 amends the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions Act to make the Director of the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada a member of the committee established under subsection 18(1) of that Act. It also amends the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act to enable the Director to exchange information with the other members of that committee.
Part 11 amends the Sex Offender Information Registration Act to, among other things,
(a) make certain changes to a sex offender’s reporting obligations, including the circumstances in which they are required to report, the information that must be provided and the time within which it is to be provided;
(b) provide that any of a sex offender’s physical characteristics that may assist in their identification may be recorded when they report to a registration centre;
(c) clarify what may constitute a reasonable excuse for a sex offender’s non-compliance with the requirement to give at least 14 days’ notice prior to a departure from their residence for seven or more consecutive days;
(d) authorize the Canada Border Services Agency to disclose certain information relating to a sex offender’s arrival in and departure from Canada to law enforcement agencies for the purposes of the administration and enforcement of that Act;
(e) authorize, in certain circumstances, the disclosure of information collected under that Act if there are reasonable grounds to believe that it will assist in the prevention or investigation of a crime of a sexual nature; and
(f) clarify that a person who discloses information under section 16 of that Act with the belief that they are acting in accordance with that section is not guilty of an offence under section 17 of that Act.
It also makes a related amendment to the Customs Act .

Strengthening Canada's Immigration System and Borders Act

[Tim Watchorn, Liberal, Les Pays-d'en-Haut, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to know why it is important to introduce the elements we are proposing in Bill C‑12 rather than in Bill C‑2, which was introduced initially.

[Arielle Kayabaga, Liberal, London West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, as I explained in my speech just now, we were asked to review our approach by stakeholders, and it was in light of the information they supplied that we split this bill. The spirit and idea of wanting to protect our borders are still there.

Last week, as I was saying, I was in Windsor to echo the announcement by the Prime Minister regarding the hiring of 1,000 new officers to work at the borders and ensure Canada's security. We said we would do that during the election campaign and we will continue to do that.

This bill is before us today so that we can discuss it. We will go to committee so that people can discuss it further, and we will reach a consensus that will result in a good bill that our workers want and that they will be able to have.

[Sukhman Gill, Conservative, Abbotsford—South Langley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to start by saying I will be splitting my time with the member for Similkameen—South Okanagan—West Kootenay.

It is always a privilege to stand in the House representing the wonderful people of Abbotsford—South Langley. Today, I rise to address many serious issues affecting my community, something I wish I did not have to keep doing over and over again.

Bill C-12 fails to adequately address several key issues within our immigration system and at our borders. While the public safety minister claims that the legislation will make Canada safer, the bill ultimately falls short on delivering on those promises. In my community of Abbotsford—South Langley, a major border crossing and hot spot for illicit drugs and arms smuggling, this failure is very real with real consequences.

I have stood in this chamber numerous times to raise concerns about extortion and the rising wave of gun violence that is occurring, terrorizing our neighbourhoods and communities. We are calling for stronger border security, yet the Liberals have turned a blind eye, ignoring the urgent need to secure our borders, toughen crime laws and prioritize the safety of victims over the interests of gun smugglers, gangsters and violent criminals. My community members should not have to live in fear wondering if they will be the next victim of a drive-by shooting, or worry that their children might be hit with a stray bullet while sleeping in their bedroom or playing at the park.

Securing Canada's borders and being tough on crime means giving our citizens peace of mind that illegal firearms and harmful drugs are not flooding our streets. Why do the Liberals not understand these basic measures? The Liberals' track record says it all. They are not serious about securing our borders or keeping Canadians safe. According to Health Canada and the latest figures, there were a total of 49,000 opioid deaths reported between January 2016 and June 2024. Many were due to drug ingredients trafficked from China and Mexico.

The Washington Post reported in December 2023 that fentanyl super labs in Canada are producing mass amounts of drugs as well. The super labs that police are finding in Canada differ because they are synthesizing the drug with chemicals sourced primarily from China. In Langley, British Columbia, in my own community, police recently uncovered a super lab containing enough fentanyl and materials to kill 95 million people. Langley authorities also reported on how this super lab was capable of producing multiple kilograms of fentanyl on a weekly basis, yet this bill still lacks mandatory prison sentences for fentanyl traffickers. This is just disgraceful.

To make matters worse, with so many lives lost, the Liberals continue to push for safe consumption sites near schools. Conservatives urged the Liberals at the health committee to shut down fentanyl consumption sites located close to schools and children for their safety. However, the Liberals and the Liberal health minister refused to rule out approving even more sites near schools and day cares, despite admitting these locations have become hot spots for rampant fentanyl use.

In my riding, the Liberals are planning to slap a safe consumption site right across the street from a school. I have spoken with many parents, such as the parents from the Abbotsford Traditional School and those in the PAC that is also responsible for the school. They are genuinely concerned for their children's safety. They want to know what is happening in our communities. It is troubling. I find myself asking, alongside them, the same question, as this is truly concerning for our communities and children. Is this the Canada our children should be brought up in?

If that was not bad enough, the Liberals' own public safety minister admits he will not even do his job to keep Canada safe. He has stated that he is not responsible for hiring a thousand new CBSA agents. Why are Canadians paying him? His role is to protect Canadians by securing our borders, and right now, he is failing at that. We are not expecting him to do the job interviews himself, but we expect him to follow through, do his job and hire agents accordingly. The fact is that fewer than a hundred agents have been hired. This is simply unacceptable.

To make matters worse, gun crime under the Liberal government has risen by 116% over the past nine years, and the Toronto Police Association reports that 85% of gun crimes involve illegal firearms trafficked from the United States, yet the Liberal government will still allow some of the worst criminals to receive house arrest. How exactly is this supposed to make Canadians feel safe?

Canadian agencies have identified 350 organized crime rings inside our country, including 63 linked to international groups from China and Mexico. The Liberal government allowed multiple ISIS terrorists into Canada, including one who was caught desecrating a body abroad and who was later charged with planning attacks in Canada.

In 2022, a senior Iranian official was banned from entering Canada due to human rights abuses and terrorism, yet several investigations into Iranian agents on Canadian soil remain open. We know the government has lost 600 foreign nationals with criminal records, and over 400 of those evading the government are convicted of serious criminality right here in Canada. The government has openly admitted it has lost track of how many people are living in Canada illegally.

In my own riding, a sergeant from the Abbotsford Police Department reported that in my community there have been 60 incidents involving border jumpers on just one road alone. It is obvious that in my community there is an urgent need for border security and that it remains insecure, yet this bill fails to adequately address these concerns and serves as nothing more than Liberal empty promises.

Conservatives are focused on making sure we prioritize Canadians' safety. Conservatives forced the Liberals to retreat from Bill C-2, which threatened Canadians' freedoms and privacy, as we believe wholeheartedly that law-abiding Canadians should never be made to pay for the government's failures on borders and immigration.

We will continue to defend Canadians' privacy and demand that the Liberals become tough on crime, end their soft-on-crime sentencing for serious violent repeat offenders, put a stop to drug trafficking that kills a record number of Canadians, secure our porous borders that risk this country's very own fabric and put criminals behind bars where they belong.

It is my duty to stand up for my constituents and to hold the government accountable. I will continue to fight for meaningful action to restore the safety every Canadian deserves. The minister opposite may claim the border is secure, but it is easy to say that when the evidence and statistics my colleagues and I continue to raise are ignored.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, Bill C-12, a substantial piece of legislation that would make our borders secure, is complemented by literally hundreds of millions of dollars of commitments, increases in the number of Canada border control officers and increases in the number of RCMP officers.

The member spent a great deal of his time talking about the need for bail reform. The good news is that bail reform will also be coming very soon.

The issue I have with the member and the Conservative caucus is that they have this persistence in not allowing things to get to the committee stage, specifically when dealing with crime-related issues. I am wondering if he can explain to those who might be following the debate why the Conservative Party is so resistant to allowing things to go to committee in a timely fashion, where Canadians and stakeholders could give direct input to members, who can continue to debate it at committee.

[Sukhman Gill, Conservative, Abbotsford—South Langley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the truth is that Canadians are worse off now than ever. There is extortion happening in my community in Surrey, British Columbia, as well as in Abbotsford. It is happening repeatedly. The crime rates are higher now than ever. We need to make sure we can take care of our communities now and that we are bringing forward legislation that is not the watered down legislation of the Liberals. Conservatives are bringing forward the “three strikes and you're out” rule, which is what we need to implement safety on our streets and in our communities.

[Luc Thériault, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Standing Committee on Health spent a year working on the toxic drug crisis. All the experts said that cracking down on clandestine labs was absolutely crucial. One way to do this is to take action on the precursors, in other words, the substances used to make illicit drugs.

Part 2 of Bill C‑12 gives the Minister of Health the authority to better regulate these precursors. I would like to hear my colleague's thoughts on part 2 of the bill.

[Sukhman Gill, Conservative, Abbotsford—South Langley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the truth is that the health minister has allowed drugs to be poured into our country. In my home riding alone, I can give the example of how there is going to be another safe supply housing site that is going to be opened up across from a school, which is going to allow illicit drugs to be smuggled around the area. This is what we see as concerning. This is what we see as the whole problem. We should not allow these safe consumption sites in our communities or in Canada overall.

What Conservatives are going to do is eliminate all of these challenges that the government is putting forward and make sure that we can take drugs out of the picture for everyone.

[Frank Caputo, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Nicola, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it is always a pleasure to rise on behalf of the people of Kamloops—Thompson—Nicola.

My colleague, the member for Winnipeg North, just talked about how Conservatives do not want crime legislation to go to committee, which is completely misguided. However, I find it quite rich that, earlier today, I spoke to a bill on intimate partner violence, which would bring the greatest change for intimate partner violence that the House has ever seen. In fact, the aunt of an intimate partner who was murdered saw the member's conduct, and I am paraphrasing, but she was disgusted by what was said and the notion of the Liberal argument on this point also made by the parliamentary secretary.

How can the Liberals say on the one hand that Conservatives do not want things to go to committee, but on the other hand, stand against a bill on intimate partner violence?

[Sukhman Gill, Conservative, Abbotsford—South Langley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague is absolutely right. On this side of the House, we are really concerned. Families are reaching out to us concerned, now more than ever, as we are affected by intimate partner violence and by these big drug dens that are affecting our communities.

As of now, we want to make sure that we can be here to raise the voices of the people of our communities, because the government is just giving us big scenarios and big-mouth words, as the Liberals always do. They never deliver what the people from our community need.

[Helena Konanz, Conservative, Similkameen—South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I rise again on behalf of the people of Similkameen—South Okanagan—West Kootenay to speak to Bill C-12, , an act respecting certain measures relating to the security of Canada's borders and the integrity of the Canadian immigration system.

This bill is of critical importance to my constituents, especially those living in border communities along the B.C.-Washington State line. We have six crossings: Osoyoos, Midway, Rossland, Grand Forks, Cawston and Rock Creek. This is a very mountainous terrain and one of the longest sections of border between Canada and the United States.

Our entire riding is on the front lines of serious challenges: cross-border crime, drug trafficking and illegal weapons smuggling. Crime rates in communities throughout the riding of Similkameen—South Okanagan—West Kootenay have soared in the past decade. Sadly, the federal government has been slow to respond. Conservatives have long pushed for concrete measures to strengthen border security and disrupt criminal networks. For years, the Trudeau Liberals chose to look the other way.

Bill C-12 is an improvement, but only because Conservatives and Canadians pushed back against the original version, Bill C-2. I received so many emails about Bill C-2 from people who were extremely concerned about Liberal overreach again. As Conservatives, we have argued that this had much less to do with strong borders and, of course, much more to do with government overreach.

Let us be clear. If the Liberals had passed Bill C-2 unopposed, they would have granted themselves sweeping powers, including letting Canada Post open my private mail and other people's without a warrant, allowing warrantless access to Canadians' personal data, and forcing tech companies to re-engineer their platforms for easier government surveillance. Those proposals were not about protecting our borders. They were about infringing on law-abiding Canadians' privacy. That is a victory for Canadians and for democracy, but vigilance is still required.

Let us examine the government's track record. Since 2015, there has been a 632% increase in U.S. border patrol encounters involving people illegally crossing from the U.S. into Canada, many of whom are linked to drug and firearms trafficking. In Canada, 350 organized crime groups have been identified, yet instead of targeting gangs and smugglers, the Liberals have spent millions harassing licensed, law-abiding firearms owners with arbitrary bans that do nothing to make our communities safer. Meanwhile, gun crime is up 116% and 85% of gun offences involve illegal firearms from the United States from that porous border for the last decade.

Our border is dangerously understaffed. Mark Weber, national president of the Customs and Immigration Union, says the CBSA is short 2,000 frontline officers. As well, while the public safety minister keeps reannouncing plans to hire 1,000 agents, when asked why none have been hired yet, he said that he was not responsible for hiring. If he is not responsible for hiring, who is? What is the point of a minister who cannot deliver on his own promises? Even if hiring were to begin today, the CBSA is treading water.

Thanks to sharp questioning from my colleague, the member for Oshawa, we learned from Mr. Weber that the agency trains just 600 officers per year, exactly the same as the attrition rate, when one does the math. In Mr. Weber's words, “I don't know how we're going to get our numbers up”.

What about hiring 1,000 RCMP officers? The border communities in my riding do not have enough RCMP officers, due to a lack of people applying at Depot. How is the government planning on bringing 1,000 more, when we cannot even address the needs we currently have?

If the government truly wants to support border enforcement, here is one easy step: Please renew the lease of the Penticton Shooting Sports Association, which is in my riding. This facility has 400 members and has provided firearms training for law enforcement for 40 years. It is often the only option in southern British Columbia. The RCMP wrote a public letter supporting the club, and the Liberal member for Kelowna recently called in a public letter for its lease to be renewed.

The lease expires in a matter of months. We are asking the Liberal government to find a way for this 40-year-old club to survive. This can be a bipartisan, common-sense decision. Do not shut down critical RCMP, CBSA and prison guard training infrastructure. Support this very important community club.

Now I want to draw attention to a key section of the legislation, section 2, which would amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act to give the Minister of Health a faster process to restrict precursor chemicals like deadly fentanyl. That is so overdue, but granting the power is not enough. Will the minister use it? Will she act quickly enough? People are dying on a daily basis in our communities.

Just this month, at the health committee, I asked why the health minister will not revoke the Health Canada exemption that enabled a pilot program of hard-drug decriminalization in B.C. Premier Eby has now called the policy a mistake, and a Liberal MP recently admitted that “it was a terrible policy decision.” The exemption clearly states that the minister can end the program at any time. When asked why she has not, she deflected, suggesting that B.C. must request it. Let me be clear: British Columbians want it ended immediately.

A member from across the aisle just told a story about an envelope full of fentanyl that was distributed throughout her community, and said to think of all of the people who were hurt by it because Canada Post could not open the envelope. I want to know how many MPs in this room would like to join the pilot program and have fentanyl decriminalized in their hometown. The experiment has gone horribly wrong. It has increased drug availability and public disorder while failing to connect addicts with real treatment. Why do members think no other provinces have joined the program?

The minister should act today and end the program immediately.

In closing, Bill C-12 is a major improvement over its original form, but only because Conservatives held the government to account. There is more work to do, and we will continue to push for common-sense changes, such as strengthening our borders, protecting civil liberties, targeting real criminal threats and giving our border communities the tools they need to stay safe.

The House resumed from October 20 consideration of the motion that Bill C-12, An Act respecting certain measures relating to the security of Canada's borders and the integrity of the Canadian immigration system and respecting other related security measures, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

[Aslam Rana, Liberal, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin by acknowledging that we are gathered today on the traditional and unceded territory of the Algonquin and Anishinabe people.

I am pleased to rise in the chamber to speak about the ways we can and must improve Canada's asylum system through the legislative amendments proposed in Bill C-12.

Canada's immigration system has long been a source of pride and a key driver of economic growth. As global migration patterns evolve due to conflicts and crises, the government is committed to restoring balance and trust by building a more flexible and responsive system that safely manages the flow of people entering the country. The bill is an important and timely opportunity to address the mounting challenges Canada faces at our borders. I will go through some of these challenges and how the legislative changes in the bill would guide us toward a more secure and productive future.

The first challenge facing many countries is the sharp rise in the number of people seeking asylum. Millions of people continue to flee conflict, persecution and instability, driving one of the most significant global migration shifts in modern history. Migration patterns are also evolving as people move across borders and oceans in search of safety and opportunity. Canada continues to be a destination of choice for those looking to build a better future.

In 2022, Canada processed over 91,000 asylum claims. That number rose to over 143,000 in 2023 and to over 171,000 in 2024, nearly doubling in just two years. Our system has been strained by this increase. It has caused lengthy processing time and backlogs, as well as prolonged uncertainty for claimants.

The bill puts forward amendments to improve the efficiency of asylum claim processing so that claimants would receive the fast, fair and final decisions they deserve. The proposed changes touch multiple parts of the process, from initial entry to timelines for decisions and follow-up actions. The focus is on the streamlining of operations while maintaining fairness and security.

To start with, the bill proposes using a single online application for all claims. Right now, applications can be different depending on where the claim is made, whether that is at an airport, a land border office or an immigration office in Canada. A single online application would allow information to be shared more easily across Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada; the Canada Border Services Agency; and the decision-making body, the Immigration and Refugee Board. The change would make the process more efficient for everyone.

Next, we propose to enhance due diligence and reduce backlogs by making sure a claim is hearing-ready before it is referred to the Immigration and Refugee Board to schedule a hearing. Ensuring that only hearing-ready files are referred to the board would allow cases to be scheduled more confidently, reducing the need to postpone or follow up on incomplete files. The change would also strengthen program integrity by minimizing the back and forth between organizations.

We also propose to improve the system by making it easier for the Immigration and Refugee Board to remove incomplete or unresponsive claims from caseload inventories. According to the bill, the board's refugee protection division would have the authority to determine that an application has been abandoned when a claimant fails to comply with certain requirements. It already has the authority to deem an asylum claim abandoned after it has been referred to it. It would now also be able to deem the claim abandoned if the requirements are not met before referral, such as in the case of submitting an incomplete application or failing to respond to requests.

Claimants would still have the opportunity to explain why their claim should not be abandoned. The right would be enshrined in the legislation. Similarly, we propose to give the minister the authority to determine that a claim is withdrawn, following the request by a claimant or their representative. Today, it needs to be referred to the Immigration and Refugee Board for a separate withdrawal process.

To assist with faster decision-making, we propose to officially transfer scheduling authority to the Immigration and Refugee Board. We would also mandate that in-Canada asylum claims can be adjudicated by the board only while the claimant is physically present in Canada. Likewise, admissibility hearings could also be held only while a person is here in Canada. These changes would help protect against fraud, reduce the need for postponements and maximize the availability of resources.

The bill next addresses how to mitigate sudden increases in asylum claims and reduce pressure on the asylum system, while deterring those who may look to misuse the system. Canada's asylum system is already under significant strain, and we need to protect against potential future surges and alleviate the backlog. The new provisions would provide protection for those in need, while discouraging claims from people seeking to use the asylum system to get around immigration rules or to extend their temporary stay in Canada.

That starts with creating an ineligibility rule for the claims that are not made within a reasonable timeline. The legislative changes would make claims made more than a year after the claimant first arrives in Canada ineligible to be referred to the Immigration and Refugee Board. This measure would apply to anyone who entered the country after June 24, 2020, including people in Canada on a work or study permit. It is meant to discourage misuse of the asylum system by those seeking a shortcut around regular immigration processes.

There are several practical reasons for the amendment. The one-year time limit was chosen because a significant majority of people make a claim within their first year of being in Canada. The use of a one-year period is also a clear and easily communicated timeline for asylum seekers to understand the period in which their claim may be found eligible. The amendment would capture the claims of anyone who entered Canada after June 24, 2020, and it would apply whether the person has current valid status or has renewed their status, whether their status has expired or whether they were issued a new permit because the one-year starting point for the eligibility will be their first entry into Canada.

While irregular border crossings have dropped significantly since the Safe Third Country Agreement was expanded in 2023, we still want to make a targeted legislative amendment. Under this change, foreign nationals who cross irregularly into Canada from the U.S. and make an asylum claim after 14 days would no longer have their claim referred to the Immigration and Refugee Board.

Crossing into Canada between official border crossings is illegal and dangerous. We always urge people to use safe, regular pathways to enter our country, and always at ports of entry. People whose claims are found ineligible under the new rules would be able to apply for a pre-removal risk assessment to ensure that they are not being returned to a country or a situation where they would face persecution or serious harm.

A third challenge Canada needs to be better equipped to face is another major world event like the COVID-19 pandemic. When that started, people put their travel plans on hold, but Canada's inventory of applications continued to grow. The current laws allow us to act in certain cases with individual documents, but not on a large scale in response to wide-ranging emergencies.

We do not have the ability to cancel, suspend or change large numbers of immigration documents, which limits our management and response to unpredictable scenarios when needed. The legislation would allow the government to act on a large scale for immigration documents, like temporary resident visas, eTAs and permits. The government could also pause acceptance of new applications and suspend or cancel applications in our inventory when it is in the public interest to do so. Giving Canada more control over its immigration documents would allow us to respond to exceptional events in ways that protect Canadians and our public resources.

A well-managed and efficient asylum system does more than uphold our international obligations; it ensures protection for the world's most vulnerable people while helping Canada maintain stability and compassion in an increasingly unpredictable world. The government is committed to strengthening Canadians' trust in the integrity of our immigration system. We do that by making sure our system remains fair and compassionate for those who are seeking our protection, while being effective, orderly and reliable for the country as a whole.

The measures in Bill C-12 would help reinforce program integrity, speed up processing and offer greater clarity and certainty to people fleeing conflict and persecution when they need it most. We would be strengthening the system to reflect these realities and to prepare for the challenges of tomorrow.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate my colleague's thoughts and expressions on the whole asylum issue. I think it is worthy of note that, whether it is with respect to the asylum issues in 2012 or those today, there is a time when we need to look at ways we can improve upon the system, and that is exactly what the legislation would do. It recognizes the need for change because of things that have taken place. Whether with respect to the pandemic or the wave of international students, there are some serious issues. By passing the legislation, we would be reforming the system.

I wonder whether my colleague can provide his thoughts on just how important it is that we pass the legislation because of the types of changes we need in immigration today.

[Aslam Rana, Liberal, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, we are committed to ensuring that our asylum system is efficient and flexible in the face of global crises.

Let me be clear: Canada's asylum system is not a shortcut. That is why we introduced the measures: to reduce pressure on our system and protect it from a sudden rise in claims.

[Jeremy Patzer, Conservative, Swift Current—Grasslands—Kindersley, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I could not help but notice that, although we are debating the border bill today, the government already tabled a bill earlier in the current Parliament and has already had to basically withdraw it and present a new bill because it messed up the first one so badly.

I know that my colleague is newer to Parliament. I wonder how he feels so far about his own government's messing up so badly that, here in Parliament, Bill C-12 is already a redo of one of the bills it had already tabled.