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

[Connie Cody, Conservative, Cambridge, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the government says that Bill C-12 protects Canadians, yet it expands government powers to collect and share personal information across departments.

Could he speak to why it is so important that Parliament scrutinize these new authorities to ensure Canadians' privacy is not compromised?

[Chak Au, Conservative, Richmond Centre—Marpole, BC]

Mr. Speaker, we have to protect the rights of Canadians. We cannot accept this power being unchecked. Canadians deserve to have protection within the Constitution. That is why we cannot accept this kind of power being unchecked and being given without any kind of balance.

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

Mr. Speaker, when I look at Bill C-12, as I have mentioned previously, I see it as a very important commitment that the Prime Minister made to Canadians, which was to secure our border and make sure that we have an increase in personnel, with 1,000 new border patrol officers and 1,000 new RCMP officers. This will have real and tangible results.

I am wondering if the member opposite could provide his thoughts on why it is important that we see a legislative initiative taken to support a secure border.

[Chak Au, Conservative, Richmond Centre—Marpole, BC]

Mr. Speaker, as has been pointed out, these kinds of promises and commitments have been recycled many times. If they are very serious about providing the resources and the manpower to strengthen our security system, they should have done so many weeks or months ago and not recycled the same commitment again and again, pretending that they are doing something.

The House resumed 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.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

Mr. Speaker, a border is not just a line on a map. It is a symbol of our security, our sovereignty and our ability to make our own decisions.

For 10 years, the federal government has been turning a blind eye while stolen vehicles leave our ports, fentanyl crosses our borders and Quebec alone bears the brunt of unprecedented migratory pressure.

Today Ottawa is taking action, but only because it no longer has a choice. During all that time, the Bloc Québécois has been calling for better border control and increased efforts to combat organized crime and drug trafficking.

To us and the Government of Quebec, Bill C-12 is a step in the right direction. However, let us be clear: Our support is not a carte blanche endorsement.

Before praising the bill, we must also recognize its limitations. This bill incorporates several measures already included in Bill C-2, which is intended to combat transnational organized crime. Rather than piling up more legislation, the government would do better to enforce existing laws.

I would like to remind the House that the government's border security promises are not new. On April 10, 2025, in the midst of the election campaign, the Liberal leader, the Prime Minister that is, proudly announced in Brampton that his government would hire 1,000 RCMP officers and another 1,000 CBSA officers in order to curb the flow of migrants and combat fentanyl trafficking.

Six months later, on October 17, the same Prime Minister repeated the same announcement word for word, this time presenting it as a bold new measure. The same numbers, the same promise, the same speech—in short, nothing new at all.

If anyone is looking for concrete proof of the disparity between words and actions, they need only think of Roxham Road, a symbol of the Liberals' failure to control our borders. Between 2017 and 2023, more than 150,000 people crossed this border irregularly. In 2022 alone, there were nearly 40,000 crossings, more than all previous years combined. Of these irregular entries, nearly 90% were in Quebec. Quebec therefore bore the human, logistical and financial burden of this situation alone, spending more than $400 million on accommodation, services and support. Rather than taking action, Ottawa allowed the issue to fester, repeating that nothing could be done, until the pressure became untenable.

When the Bloc Québécois asked to renegotiate the safe third country agreement to close Roxham Road, the government responded with bureaucratic excuses. As a result, there have been six years of neglect and Quebec was left to fend for itself.

This makeshift system where Quebec's role is to pay up while Ottawa communicates is a shining example of the federal government's denial. A border left open for six years is no border. It is an abdication of responsibility.

Ottawa likes to talk about a strong Canada. However, a strong country is not built on press releases. It is built with staff, equipment and commitment.

Let us talk about staff. The customs union estimates that the Canada Border Services Agency currently needs another 2,000 to 3,000 officers to properly fulfill its mandate. The government keeps making announcements, but on the ground, positions remain vacant. Inspections are not being conducted at ports, and border regions are still awaiting reinforcements.

The government even promised to review the pension plans of frontline officers in recognition of the fact that their jobs are so difficult, but once again, there was no meaningful follow-up. Officers are still waiting for concrete action, not press releases.

The government may be proud of its promises, but what it is saying in press conferences does not match reality. Trust is built on action, not on mere intentions.

The Bloc Québécois, like the customs union, is asking that Ottawa authorize CBSA officers to patrol between border crossings. We are not talking about replacing the RCMP, but rather empowering CBSA officers to intervene on the ground in places where trafficking and illegal border crossings occur. Nothing is preventing the government from doing so, apart from its own inaction.

When containers filled with stolen vehicles leave our ports without undergoing any inspection, this is not an administrative detail. It is a loss of sovereignty.

The border is also a matter of economic sovereignty. When imported products are brought into the country in violation of trade rules, our producers and local businesses pay the price. The Bloc Québécois will support any measure that protects Quebec's security and economy.

As the Bloc Québécois's science and innovation critic, I would also like to address the issue of asylum claims filed by some international students. For months now, universities have been sounding the alarm about the worrisome issue of fake students who enter Canada on a student visa, attend no classes and make an asylum claim after one year. These cases of fraud undermine the credibility of our university system and deny genuine talent a place at these institutions. In a system that limits the number of international students, every spot matters.

The most troubling thing about this is the way Ottawa has reacted. Instead of taking responsibility, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada is asking universities to police foreign students and to verify every student's attendance record and legitimacy. It seems to expect deans to act as immigration officers. Meanwhile, the same department is refusing to provide universities with data on individuals who filed a refugee claim after getting a study permit. In other words, Ottawa is asking universities to solve a problem without giving them the necessary information to do that. This inconsistency is irresponsible. The Bloc Québécois will not allow universities to become an administrative appendage of a department that is not doing its job. We are pleased that the bill seeks to close this loophole, but a lot more needs to be done to make Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada genuinely transparent and accountable.

This bureaucratic inconsistency is also clear from the way Ottawa administers the safe third country agreement. For too long, this agreement allowed anyone who entered irregularly outside an official point of entry to file an asylum claim if they were not intercepted within 14 days. This provision encouraged clandestine and sometimes hazardous crossings. The government partially closed this loophole, but it did so without negotiating with Washington, preferring a unilateral solution instead. Now, anyone intercepted after 14 days will be returned to their country of origin, unless it is a moratorium country. This is progress, but it is still incomplete.

The Bloc Québécois will be monitoring the impact of this reform to ensure it does not create any new inconsistencies. We will also be scrutinizing the provisions that give new powers to the federal immigration minister, particularly the proposed addition to section 87 that would allow the minister to suspend, cancel or refuse to process visas, electronic travel authorizations or study permits. There is a legitimate objective for that, namely to combat fraud.

However, these powers must be circumscribed, especially if they impact permanent residents selected by Quebec. If there are no guardrails on this power, it could even invalidate decisions made under the Quebec experience program or other federal-provincial agreements. This would set a momentous precedent.

For years, Quebec has accepted a disproportionate number of asylum seekers, significantly in excess of its intake capacity. This situation has become untenable. The Bloc Québécois will ensure that Quebec's voice is heard, so that a fairer redistribution can be put in place and refugees can be accommodated in a way that respects Quebec's capacity and jurisdiction.

At committee, we will propose that the public safety minister be required to table a public report each year on the resources and operations of the CBSA. Quebeckers have the right to know whether their border is really being protected. This debate highlights a broader issue. When Ottawa centralizes, Quebec waits. When Ottawa promises, Quebec must be patient. When Ottawa fails, it is Quebec that pays the price.

To summarize, the Bloc Québécois will support Bill C-12 at second reading, but let us be clear: Our support is not a free pass.

[Caroline Desrochers, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Housing and Infrastructure]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his commitment to supporting the bill at second reading. We listened to stakeholders' concerns, including those raised by the Bloc Québécois. That is why we are introducing a bill with a narrowed scope and with provisions that are better suited to what we really want to address.

The Bloc Québécois members have often said that people want stricter border measures and tougher action on crime. I do not know why, but since the Bloc has heard about this bill, they have not taken a position on the new scope of the document.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

Mr. Speaker, it is pretty easy to understand. What we want is to restore public trust in the security of our borders. I will say it again: Trust is built with actions, not intentions. Right now, we are constantly being fed recycled statements.

As I said in my speech, the Prime Minister repeated what he had said six months ago. Now we are being told that there will be money in the next budget on November 4. The Liberals cannot even tell us how many new officers they hired in the last six months. They are patting themselves on the back and telling us to trust them because there will be 2,000 new officers, but they are short more than the number that they promised. This is already an inconsistency. Once again, why wait months to do something that they could have done before?

I am all for hearing that things are going in the right direction, but they need to stop trying to pacify people with press conferences and take action, instead of questioning motives and saying nice things at press conferences.

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

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

I appreciate what my colleague just said, and I want to build on the question that was just asked.

I recently met with the union for the CBSA. The CBSA can maybe get 700 people per year through training. It loses between 500 and 600 people a year through attrition. Job satisfaction is extremely low, potentially the lowest in the government. The max number of people it can get through training per year is 200. Furthermore, since there is no budget, when it comes to police, anybody who is doing an acting job cannot get paid, so delaying the budget has real consequences.

Does my colleague see these things as concerns? To me as a Conservative, as a critic and as a Canadian, they are large concerns.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

Mr. Speaker, we can see the consequences. I gave the example of Roxham Road. I would have liked the Conservative Party to get more involved in this issue. When 150,000 people use a loophole to enter irregularly, I think that is a problem, but the Conservatives only get involved when it suits them.

To answer my colleague's question, the consequences are already apparent: Organized crime is becoming more prevalent in communities and people feel unsafe. Then there is fentanyl. Again, this requires coordination and mobilizing resources, not just good intentions. I hope the government will get to work as soon as possible. It needs to hire officers, but also ensure coordination, with a coordinated strategic plan.

[Gabriel Ste-Marie, Bloc, Joliette—Manawan, QC]

Mr. Speaker, we have talked about the good intentions in what the government is saying. However, my colleague also raised the fact that there is a shortage of officers. He said that the government has promised to hire 2,000 more officers, which may not even be enough. During the election campaign, we were told that about 2,000 officers would be hired, but the Speech from the Throne only mentioned 1,000 additional RCMP officers, not CBSA officers.

The Customs and Immigration Union is asking Ottawa to allow border services officers to patrol between border crossings, not to replace the RCMP, but rather to give federal agencies more depth and flexibility in enforcing the law. The Bloc Québécois also supports this request.

Can my colleague comment on that?

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, John Nater]

The member for Rimouski—La Matapédia has 35 seconds to respond.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

Mr. Speaker, 35 seconds is not enough time to explain this government's bungling over the past 10 years. Again, Roxham Road is a monumental disaster.

To return to my colleague's question, last April the government promised us 2,000 officers: 1,000 for the RCMP and 1,000 for the CBSA. Last week, the Liberals held another press conference and repeated what they said in April. They told us that we have to wait for the next budget, that it will be in there. That is just straight-up recycling.

What we are telling them is that they need to listen to what the people on the ground are asking for and saying. According to the Customs and Immigration Union, Canada has never had so little control over its borders. I am not saying that to scare people, but if we want to find solutions to a problem, then we have to face reality and tell people the truth in order to bolster public confidence.

[Jason Groleau, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am very proud to be representing the people of Beauce today once again in the House.

Today, we are debating a bill that goes to the very heart of our country: our ability to welcome, integrate and protect those who choose to come to Canada. The Liberal government's Bill C‑12 is an improvement over Bill C‑2. We must acknowledge this.

Bill C‑12 aims to modernize the immigration system. It claims to make the process more transparent and to improve the planning of the long-term immigration levels in order to meet Canada's economic needs. In reality, this bill lacks clear direction. It is weak and has lax security measures. Most importantly, it is disconnected from the reality on the ground. We need to listen to Canadians. Paying attention to the reality on the ground should be a priority for everyone, but especially this Liberal government.

For years now, the Liberals have been promising to reform the immigration system. During these years, the system has been crumbling, backlogs have been piling up, processes have gotten increasingly complex and the provinces have been left to fend for themselves to deal with the consequences of the decisions made by the Liberals in Ottawa.

While the government keeps coming out with more and more announcements and slogans, communities are feeling the direct pressure of these poorly planned policies. Canadians, the people of Beauce, families and business owners are all saying the same thing: The Liberal government has lost control.

My colleague will be pleased to hear me say that Roxham Road became the symbol of this loss of control. It was wide open. Tens of thousands of people entered Canada illegally in plain sight. Everyone saw that. There was no security and no proper screening. What did the government do? It did absolutely nothing. It allowed things to get worse, weakening our immigration system and eroding public trust.

Let us be clear, there is a difference between legitimate refugees fleeing war and persecution and illegal migrants circumventing the law. The situation is also very different when it comes to economic workers, who are desperately needed in certain regions of Canada. The Liberal government created and maintained this confusion.

Meanwhile, the consequences are very real: We have a housing shortage, skyrocketing rents and overburdened public services. This is not ideology; it is a simple mathematical reality. When hundreds of thousands of people arrive without a plan to accommodate them and without enough housing, rents go up. It is simple math. That is fundamental. It is simple. Everyone saw it.

Bill C-12 claims to strengthen the security and integrity of the system, but once again, it is superficial. There need to be more resources, fewer announcements and some decisive action. The government needs to implement effective mechanisms to deport criminals and improve border surveillance.

While the government dwells on processes, criminals are getting organized. Drug traffickers, arms smugglers and groups associated with cartels are taking advantage of these government loopholes. As we said earlier, the border is really porous. Our borders have become a vulnerable point.

Canada needs a clear plan, well-monitored borders and rigorous screening at entry and exit points. Our border officers and police officers need more support. Most importantly, there needs to be the political will to act. Bill C‑12 is weak on crime, weak on gangs and too weak to address what is actually happening on the ground. Again, I am talking about the reality on the ground.

Beyond immigration, another crucial issue for the safety of Canadians is the reform of the bail system. Too often, individuals accused of serious crimes are being released without sufficient safeguards, which endangers the public and undermines confidence in our justice system.

The Liberal government has failed to take decisive action on this issue, favouring measures that prioritize the rights of alleged offenders over the safety of victims and citizens.

It is essential that Bill C-12 or any other reform include more rigorous mechanisms for denying bail to individuals who pose a real risk to society. We must strengthen the role of judges so that they have the tools they need to protect Canadians, taking into account not only the presumption of innocence, but also the paramount importance of public safety.

Furthermore, protecting the fundamental rights of Canadians must remain an unwavering priority in any legislative reform. A responsible government must be able to rigorously defend these rights, while ensuring social peace and the rule of law. This is how Canada will maintain its status as a free and orderly society.

A poorly monitored border is an open door to illegal activities such as arms and drug trafficking or illegal immigration. Our border officers do an excellent job, but they simply lack resources. Again, the government is only making announcements. It is not taking action.

It is important to remember that some regions, like Beauce, share a direct border with the United States, in my case, with the state of Maine. This geographic reality demands greater vigilance. Bill C-12 does not propose any measures to better protect these sensitive areas. It completely ignores the unique challenges specific to border regions. This is a serious flaw in an already fragile system. Canadians deserve better. They deserve a government that protects them, takes action and stands up for the integrity of our country. The safety of Canadians must always come first. We have seen the consequences when that is not the case: exploitation, fraud, crime. A responsible government does not throw open its doors without ensuring that those who enter share our values, respect our laws and contribute to our society.

Demanding rigour does not mean one is against immigration. We support a system that is fair, orderly and respected. The Conservative Party believes that we can welcome people with compassion, but also with caution and judiciousness. It is a matter of respect for Canadians and for newcomers.

Meanwhile, the Liberals are inflating immigration thresholds without taking the reality on the ground into account. The housing crisis is getting worse. Inflation is driving up housing prices. Millions of Canadians, including people in Beauce, are struggling to find housing. Rents are skyrocketing. Mortgages are drifting out of reach. There is no coordination with cities or provinces to adapt infrastructure, hospitals, schools or housing. That is irresponsible. In many regions, including Beauce, businesses are desperately looking for skilled workers. The current federal system is failing employers. They have to navigate a complicated and lengthy bureaucratic maze while highly skilled foreign workers wait in limbo.

Bill C‑12 is a step in the right direction, but it does not solve anything. It does not align immigration with actual economic needs. It overlooks rural and industrial regions. It does not support businesses, families or local growth.

Another essential element is that the provinces have been excluded from the planning. There is no coordination, no serious dialogue. However, they are the ones that must provide education, health care and housing services. As a result, schools are overwhelmed, hospitals are overflowing and there is not enough housing. Ottawa makes all the decisions but then always blames everybody else.

The Conservative Party is proposing a different path, an approach based on collaboration, listening, and shared responsibility. Provinces and municipalities have to have a say, because they are close to the reality and know their limitations. Immigration cannot be simply a matter of quotas. It also needs to take integration, social cohesion and shared values into account. That is what we, as Conservatives, promise to do.

[Caroline Desrochers, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Housing and Infrastructure]

Mr. Speaker, it is a bit of a stretch for my colleague from the Quebec Conservative caucus to say such a thing when he knows full well that the Province of Quebec is actively consulted on all decisions affecting immigration. It is consulted more than any other province and territory in Canada.

It is a shame that what should be a debate of ideas is still being used to present divisive rhetoric on immigration.

With regard to crime, I would invite my colleague to check out the remarks made by the Prime Minister last week. We have stated very clearly what we are going to do about the issue of conditional sentences.

The Conservatives say they want stronger borders and a crackdown on organized crime. If my colleague is serious about that, will he support this bill?