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

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Alexandra Mendès), Alexandra Mendes]

Let me first offer my condolences to the hon. member.

Continuing with questions and comments, the hon. member for Waterloo has the floor.

[Bardish Chagger, Liberal, Waterloo, ON]

Madam Speaker, I also want to offer my sincere condolences on the passing of the member's mother.

I do believe it is important, when we are having debates on such important topics, that we get to hear what can make legislation better. We are at second reading. The legislation will go to committee. I think that was a little of a reaction to the comments made by the member suggesting that wearing a certain colour makes someone of a certain party and whatever the case may be.

Right now, this is an important bill. We do need to try to get it right. Canadians are asking for it. We had an election. Canadians sent us, in our respective roles, in this chamber. The NDP knows that they did not even receive party status, but they do have an important role to play here. I know that I have constituents who also recognize their important work.

I would ask the member, does she see the value in this legislation? Could it be improved at committee? Does she have some feedback that she would like the government to hear so that we can try to get it right to serve Canadians in the way we all have a desire to do?

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Madam Speaker, let me say this: Over 300 civil organizations are against the bill and are calling for the government to withdraw it.

My question is this: Why should a person's claim be ineligible simply because they visited Canada sometime in the past?

This is more of an attempt of the government to try to hollow out Canada's refugee determination system, the IRB, by pre-emptively stopping people from even applying or making an application. Perhaps that is the goal of the government, after all, to move Canada's system to where almost no one will be heard by the IRB.

Canada can do better, and we must do better. The NDP do not support the approach the government has adopted. We have lots of suggestions of how the government can do better. Let us engage in proper consultation and scrap this bill. I will be at the table with the government to work with it to bring better legislation forward to enhance and support our immigration system.

[Billy Morin, Conservative, Edmonton Northwest, AB]

Madam Speaker, it is always an honour to rise and speak in the House. I rise to speak to Bill C-12. I would like to remind the House that it was Conservatives who forced the Liberals to back down on Bill C-2, which would violate Canadians' individual freedoms and privacy. The Privacy Commissioner confirmed that the Liberals did not even consult with him when trying to grant themselves sweeping new powers to access Canadians' personal information from service providers, such as banks and telecoms, without a warrant. Law-abiding Canadians should not lose their liberty to pay for the failures of the Liberals on borders and immigration.

Now the Liberals have introduced Bill C-12. Conservatives will examine this bill thoroughly to ensure that the Liberals do not try to sneak in measures that breech law-abiding Canadians' privacy rights.

Canadians are generous and welcoming. We believe immigration should be fair, compassionate and firmly grounded in the rule of law. After years of drift, this bill is a chance to restore integrity at our borders, disrupt transnational crime and reduce the flow of the deadly synthetic drugs that are devastating families across the country.

However, security is not just a line on the map. It is reducing the number of ineligible or bad faith immigration applications so we can better fill vacant health care roles in urban, rural and indigenous communities with qualified health professionals, including medical radiation technologists, rural doctors and nurses. It means making sure that the many families in Edmonton Northwest, who have waited months or years for IRCC to process applications, have certainty about whether their loved ones or caregivers can come and stay in Canada. It is also about welcoming people who are ready to invest their time and resources to help grow Canada’s economy.

Security is built on trust and respect among neighbours, including indigenous partners on the Canadian border. It is today’s newcomers learning Canada’s story, joining the work of reconciliation and building strong communities. Bill C-12 can help us do all this if we get it right.

What does Bill C-12 do in a positive light? There are some things that we agree with. The Liberals have taken steps to strengthen some of the previous iterations of Bill C-2. First, it enables CBSA to access and examine goods upstream, in warehouses and transportation hubs, not just at the last gate. Officers will be able to find contraband hidden deep in supply chains. Second, it accelerates listing the precursor chemicals used to make fentanyl and other street drugs. Third, it improves information sharing among federal agencies, and affirms a coastal security role for the Canadian Coast Guard. This is critical across our vast shorelines and in the Arctic. Fourth, it clamps down on access to financial services by criminal networks that harm our communities. Finally, it helps to address the ongoing epidemic of crimes against indigenous women and girls by enabling information about sex offenders to be shared with indigenous police services.

Conservatives support many of these principles and aims because Canadians expect compassion, safety and accountability.

The toxic drug crisis demands urgency. Drug-related death and illness is a daily, unwelcome part of indigenous realities both on and off reserve and in our cities, where many indigenous people have chosen to live. This has had a devastating effect on current and future generations of indigenous people.

In Alberta, the toxic drug crisis is hitting indigenous people far harder than the general population, both on reserve and in cities. Despite first nations people being 3% to 4% of Alberta’s population, we accounted for 20% of opioid poisoning deaths between 2016 and 2022, and death rates have been reported at five to nine times higher than those of non-indigenous Albertans. When I was last chief, the ISC regional director reported the life expectancy for indigenous men in Alberta to be 58 years old, a nearly 20-year difference between Canadians.

The urban impact is acute. From January to May 2025, Alberta saw a sharp rise in deaths involving carfentanil, with 68% of opioid fatalities province-wide and 78% in Edmonton involving carfentanil. The most toxic supply is concentrated in major centres where many indigenous people live, work and seek services. Organized trafficking networks exploit remote communities and urban corridors, causing loss of life every day.

The losses compound intergenerational trauma, housing and economic insecurity, and barriers to culturally safe care, ultimately the resources and capacity for nations to build self-sufficiency. Nationally, more than 53,000 apparent opioid deaths have been recorded since 2016, with B.C., Alberta and Ontario bearing most of the burden, regions with large indigenous populations both on and off reserve and in urban neighbourhoods.

The reasons are complex. They include racism in system of care, housing insecurity, unsupplied policing services, a poisoned drug supply and many more things. However, one part is clear: organized crime and transnational crime networks are flooding us with deadly products.

Bill C-12 could help to improve collaboration with indigenous police forces, such as the Blood Tribe Police Service’s drug task force, which conducts drug-trafficking investigations and seizures with the RCMP crime reduction unit near the U.S. border. It could also help other indigenous police forces follow the lead set by Akwesasne Mohawk Police, which deals with human trafficking and other smuggling across its internal borders between New York, Quebec and Ontario. There are also opportunities to collaborate among first nations, CBSA, RCMP and the Coast Guard to build capacity, share crime data, and enforce Canada’s laws and first nation laws on land and water.

Bill C-12 could also help to disrupt human trafficking networks and prevent crimes against indigenous women and girls. RCMP-related agencies would be able to better track and share information about registered sex offenders with law enforcement partners, indigenous governments and U.S. partners, as well as facilitate disclosure of offender travel data. Strong cross-border and inter-agency sharing can help track high-risk offenders who move between jurisdictions that intersect with indigenous communities on and off reserve.

I would like to acknowledge the Tsuut’ina Nation Police Service, which has worked with U.S. police forces. Doing this work is a real example of the leadership indigenous communities can show with their police forces this past year.

I ask the government to go beyond symbolic gestures using the tools provided in Bill C-12. After the Auditor General’s scathing reports about the government’s chronic failure to meet its fiduciary obligations to indigenous peoples, here is an opportunity to improve safety through collaboration and reconciliation.

In conclusion, security and reconciliation are not opposites They reinforce each other when we walk together and grow trust. We must work with indigenous leaders on safeguards, such as clear limits on secondary use of data, strengthening community relationships and cultural safety, and indigenous-led measures, so the expanded powers do not encourage racial profiling or erode trust. Bill C-12 gives tools to make Canada safer if we work together with other communities, rural communities, rural Canadians and indigenous communities near our borders, our cities and beyond.

I encourage my colleagues to work in committee to amend this bill to better defend our borders and deepen our bonds through trust and security. Even with the Liberals' second attempt at such a bill, it still fails to address things such as bail reform. Catch and release is alive and well for those who traffic in fentanyl and firearms, as well as those who are using our porous border to victimize Canadians. Sentencing provisions have not been included as much as they should be. There are still no mandatory prison times for fentanyl traffickers. There are still no new mandatory prison times for gangsters who use guns to commit crimes, despite the Liberals' campaign against legal gun owners. House arrest is still permissible for some of the most serious offences.

Liberals continue to push for safe consumption sites near schools. At the health committee, my hon. colleague, the member for Riding Mountain, called on the Liberals to shut down fentanyl consumption sites next to children. This is a common-sense measure. However, the Liberal minister refused to rule out approving more consumption sites next to schools and day cares, despite acknowledging they are repositories for rampant fentanyl usage.

Only Conservatives will continue standing up for Canadians' individual rights and privacy, and hold the Liberals to account on the safety that is needed to protect Canadians.

[John-Paul Danko, Liberal, Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON]

Madam Speaker, it is really encouraging to see collaboration in the House, where we can hash something out at committee and come to a level of agreement for the best interest of all Canadians. In particular, I appreciate the member's highlighting the impacts of the opioid crisis on indigenous communities, and I would suggest some of those impacts are very similar for urban indigenous populations across Canada, including Hamilton, with subsequent issues, such as homelessness.

I am hoping, as we will very soon be tabling bail reform and strengthening sentencing legislation in the House, we will see a similar level of collaboration among all parties.

[Billy Morin, Conservative, Edmonton Northwest, AB]

Madam Speaker, I agree that bail reform, as mentioned, and being tougher on crime are needed, but collaboration is needed from Canadians from province to province; from different agencies, like the CBSA, the RCMP and provincial police forces; and from indigenous communities, urban and rural alike. I also think the Liberals need to look at their promises.

We put forward solutions on this side of the House, and they denied our solutions when it came to three-strikes laws and putting criminals away. I think this country needs to be a little more black and white. Tough love is still love in our communities, and I think the country needs to look itself in the mirror so that promises to keep Canadians safe can be kept.

[Patrick Bonin, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Madam Speaker, I would like to know what my hon. colleague thinks of the government's recent announcement that it plans to hire 1,000 additional Canada Border Services Agency officers.

According to the union, there is a shortage of 2,000 to 3,000 officers. Is my colleague satisfied with this announcement about hiring 1,000 additional officers? Does he think CBSA should aim more towards what the unions are calling for, which is 2,000 to 3,000 additional officers?

[Billy Morin, Conservative, Edmonton Northwest, AB]

Madam Speaker, I certainly agree that our police forces, whether they are the CBSA, the RCMP, provincial police forces or indigenous police forces, deserve that investment and recognition, but I do not get my hopes too high, to be honest. This announcement has been made a number of times over the last number of months, and not one officer has been hired.

I agree this is the way to go forward, but making announcements on spending money is not going to solve this. We just saw a scathing report on indigenous policing. In our communities, $13 million has gone unspent. Money that went to the RCMP did not flow down for hiring officers, so I do not get my hopes high when these simple rhetoric-type announcements are made.

[Brad Vis, Conservative, Mission—Matsqui—Abbotsford, BC]

Madam Speaker, what has become clear during our debate on Bill C-12 over the last number of days is that the measures in this bill respond to long-standing grievances outlined by the Conservatives, mainly on immigration and the open-door policies that Canada suffered under Justin Trudeau.

With some of the provisions in this bill, we hope to see some improvements in public confidence about immigration in Canada. What would the member from Alberta like to see with respect to changes to immigration policy to improve public confidence in our immigration system?

[Billy Morin, Conservative, Edmonton Northwest, AB]

Madam Speaker, I will reflect on my own family. They live on a first nation in a rural community next to a large urban centre, and they have been noticing that immigration has been mismanaged by the Liberal government. They feel forgotten in the conversation on how to improve the management of immigration.

Certainly, we welcome people who come to this country who can contribute, with compassion, and who have something to offer to Canadians, and we can live in harmony, but at this time, as we talk about employment, job readiness and a worker shortage, an indigenous population has been there forever and has been underutilized. I would like to see the engagement of first nation communities so they are part of the immigration policy context.

[Ted Falk, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

Madam Speaker, before I dive into my comments on Bill C-12, I want to acknowledge that I was here 11 years ago on this date, October 22, when Parliament came under attack by a lone gunman. I want to publicly thank the Parliamentary Protective Service and the RCMP for the safety they provided to all members of the House.

I also want to acknowledge that, during that same series of events, Corporal Nathan Cirillo lost his life while being part of the ceremonial guard at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier. Constable Samearn Son took a shot to the foot here in Parliament, and Constable Curtis Barrett was able to neutralize the threat. I want to acknowledge those individuals as well.

The Liberal government is asking Canadians to believe that Bill C-12 is different from Bill C-2 and is a new safeguard for the country. It is not. Behind the new title lies the same design: more intrusion, more bureaucracy and less freedom for Canadians. Conservatives will stand as the barrier between Canadians and any act that weakens their privacy or erodes their freedoms, and mistakes government control for public safety.

Bill C-12 must be fixed. When Conservatives forced the government to withdraw Bill C-2, it was more than another Liberal failure. That bill sought to give cabinet sweeping authority to collect and share potential personal data without judicial oversight. By stopping it, we reminded the government and our country that freedom in Canada is not a privilege granted by the government but a charter right, which we will not tolerate being trampled on by the Liberal government. The withdrawal of Bill C-2 proved that a determined opposition can still discipline a government that has grown careless with its authority and abuse of power.

When drafting Bill C-2, the government did not consult the Privacy Commissioner before proposing to grant itself warrant-free access to Canadians' financial and digital records. The text of Bill C-2, and now echoes of it in Bill C-12, envisioned power to retrieve information from banks and telecommunications providers as the “Minister considers necessary”. Wow. There would be no court order, no independent review and no safeguard against those kinds of abuses. A government that can reach into private accounts and call it protection is not defending citizens; it is blatant overreach. Rather than protection, it is control over them, and Canadians deserve better than governance by surveillance.

Law-abiding Canadians should not forfeit their freedoms to pay for the government's negligence at the border. Years of weak enforcement and negligent immigration management have left Canada vulnerable to the very criminal networks that the bill claims to confront. Rather than tightening entry controls, the government has turned inward, treating every citizen as a potential suspect.

Bill C-12 is not a defence of sovereignty, but an admission that the government has been unable or unwilling to control those who seek to enter illegally, so it will instead attempt to control its citizens. Until the government can provide the security and protection of our freedoms and sovereignty, Canadians will be the ones who bear the consequences of bad Liberal policies, policies they never asked for.

Years ago, Justin Trudeau said that he admired what he called the “basic dictatorship” of Communist China. Those remarks were not casual. They revealed a mindset that efficiency matters more than consent, that control is strength and that democracy is a hindrance to decisive rule. Yet again, the Liberal government is demonstrating that it still thinks like Justin Trudeau.

Bill C-12 carries the same impulse. Translated into law, it hides coercion in the language of administration. It expands government access to personal data, centralizes authority in ministerial hands and calls this intrusion public safety. The bill would empower officials to require any person to provide any information relevant to the minister's determination. These are not targeted, investigative powers; they are open-ended instruments of surveillance disguised as administration. Canadians should believe the Liberals when they say things like this. The Liberal project has been to replace accountability with administrative control, one regulation, one surveillance clause and one warrantless power at a time.

Now the government has returned with Bill C-12, revised in wording, but unchanged in purpose. Canadians have learned what that means: less privacy, more bureaucracy and another significant overreach into their lives under the banner of safety.

We will examine every line, every clause and every authority that Bill C-12 would grant. We will ensure there are no hidden regulations that would turn oversight into surveillance. We are not a passive opposition; we are now the country's safeguard in Parliament.

Canadians may have elected the Liberal government, but we will still protect them from its overreach. We will defend their right to live free from suspicion, to transact without intrusion and to remain citizens, not data points in a government database.

Bill C-12 would do nothing to correct the failures of the bail system, which releases violent offenders back into our streets. A government serious about justice would not tolerate repeat offenders moving drugs and weapons while communities bear the costs. The reality is that Canadians are living with the consequences of a system that mistakes leniency for progress.

True public safety begins with control of the border and certainty of punishment. Those who traffic fentanyl, smuggle weapons or endanger lives must face penalties appropriate to the crime and ones that will keep our citizens safe. A government that fails to enforce its own law creates conditions for chaos. A nation that cannot or will not secure its border cannot guarantee the security of its people.

On sentencing, the failures are unmistakable. Bill C-12 leaves untouched the absence of mandatory prison time for those who traffic in fentanyl, an offence that destroys Canadian families and communities every single day. It introduces no new mandatory penalties for gang members who commit crimes with illegal firearms. The government imposes restrictions on law-abiding hunters and farmers while failing to strengthen penalties for those who commit crimes with illegal firearms, which is by far the vast majority of gun-related crimes.

This inversion of justice reveals a deeper problem: the failure to connect law with consequence. Deterrence works only when punishment is certain and proportionate. Without it, every sentence becomes a suggestion and every criminal learns that Canada will forgive what it refuses to prevent.

A government that governs without moral distinction cannot preserve order. When there is virtually no distinction between crime and compliance and they are treated alike, the rule of law decays. Canadians do not ask for vengeance; they ask for accountability. They ask for a justice system that protects the innocent, restrains the violent, re-establishes moral clarity in law and provides appropriate punishments for criminals.

Even for serious violent offences, Bill C-12 would continue to permit house arrest. A criminal who has shattered lives should not complete punishment on the couch in his living room playing Xbox. The government calls this rehabilitation. In truth, it signals that consequences have been replaced by convenience.

When justice no longer imposes real cost on wrongdoing, crime becomes just another risk of the trade for those who profit from it. For those who are accountants and listening today, criminals do a cost-benefit analysis as well and have obviously determined that under the Liberal justice system, the cost is worth the potential benefit. This is so wrong.

The measure of justice is not leniency but credibility. Every time the government offers comfort to those who destroy others' lives, it destroys the authority of law and the safety of the public. If the government will not restore the proportion between crime and punishment, Parliament must.

The government's tolerance of so-called safe consumption sites near schools is a direct failure of responsibility and is abhorrent. No responsible nation permits narcotics facilities near schools and describes it as public health policy. These neighbourhoods deserve order, not policy experimentation presented as compassion by a woke government.

What the government calls harm reduction has become harm relocation, shifting the crisis from alleyways to doorsteps and from addicts to families. Leadership demands drawing lines, and the first line must always be to protect the innocent.

Canadians are watching a government that punishes the law-abiding citizen while excusing repeat offenders. It expands bureaucracy, weakens enforcement and governs through regulation instead of principle.

The Conservatives stand for something different. We stand for a nation where law protects the innocent, not the offender, where privacy belongs to the citizen, not to the government, and where power is exercised under restraint, not carelessly or impulsively. Real leadership defends the public without breaking its confidence. Real justice distinguishes guilt from innocence instead of confusing both through bureaucratic process.

Bill C-12 fails every one of those tests. It would add layers of control but no layers of accountability. It would strengthen institutions while breaking public confidence. It calls expanded surveillance “security” and judicial leniency “reform”.

As Conservatives, we will defend Canadians and ensure the government, once again, serves them rather than manages them. Canada deserves order rooted in freedom, justice grounded in truth and leadership that governs with courage instead of suspicion. That is what Conservatives will restore.

[Will Greaves, Liberal, Victoria, BC]

Madam Speaker, I thank the member opposite for his comments and for expressing some sentiments we hear in communities across the country. Canadians are aware there are challenges in our cities and they have turned to the government and the leadership of the Prime Minister—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Alexandra Mendès), Alexandra Mendes]

I see a member is rising on a point of order. He will not be recognized because he is not in his seat.

The hon. member for Victoria.

[Will Greaves, Liberal, Victoria, BC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague opposite for his remarks and for expressing sentiments that many Canadians share. We have challenges in our cities that require focused attention and require policy revisions, and that is what the government is taking on board. That is exactly the set of commitments that has already been announced and will be released in legislation forthcoming this week.

Does the member agree that one of the changes being called for by stakeholders across the country to address some of these challenges has to do with reforming our bail system? This means that people who are repeat violent offenders or repeat chronic offenders will no longer be on our streets creating some of the urban disorder that is ultimately leading to some of the challenges and social disruptions that the member is concerned about.

[Ted Falk, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Victoria for acknowledging many of the things I said in my speech. The lack of accountability, the lack of real consequences for repeat violent offenders and doing things like putting injection sites next to schools are all creating many problems in society and in our communities.

I applaud the member for his recognition of the things I identified in my speech. Together, I hope we can move legislation forward that will protect Canadians better, while not intruding on their privacy.