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

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry—Soulanges—Huntingdon, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask my colleague a very specific question.

Bill C-12 provides that railway companies and port authorities must pay for suitable facilities where border services can carry out inspections.

Does my colleague agree that companies, not the government, should pay for these facilities?

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I know that my colleagues are going to study the specific provisions of this bill in committee. We will have the opportunity to listen to witnesses and expert analysis, and I know that we will be able to respond based on this expertise and propose ideas following the discussions.

[Carol Anstey, Conservative, Long Range Mountains, NL]

Mr. Speaker, I have not been in the House very long, but often when we are up speaking and proposing solutions, we hear a comment from the member opposite about something that happened decades ago.

I am curious to know what hope that offers the next generation, as outlined by my colleague's speech.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are focused on the past. It is a past when, objectively, housing prices were much lower and crime, rent and unemployment were lower. We think that noting the numbers from the past is important, but so is looking to the future and casting a vision that gives young people hope once again.

The reality is that many young people are concerned about what their future will be like because of policies of the Liberal government. It is not enough to manifest hope; we need concrete proposals. That is why we have put forward the Conservative youth jobs plan that would reverse bad Liberal policies and get young people back to work.

[Bienvenu-Olivier Ntumba, Liberal, Mont-Saint-Bruno—L’Acadie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I hear my colleague speaking and I gather that he is also a father and the head of a family.

In this fast-changing world, we are facing global inflation. Yesterday, the Prime Minister, as the leader of the government, spoke to young people about the realities of life so that they would not be surprised by what lay ahead in the coming months.

As the head of the family, would my colleague tell his children the truth? Yes or no?

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I do not quite follow the question. I will continue to tell the truth, as I always have in the House, which is to articulate the specific numbers around youth unemployment and crime, to call on the government to make changes that recognize the challenges their policies have created and to make things better.

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.

[Connie Cody, Conservative, Cambridge, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it is always a privilege to rise on behalf of the people of Cambridge and North Dumfries in this place, especially to discuss an issue as important as our Canadian borders and keeping people safe.

Everyone watching at home might remember that this is not my first time in the House talking about border security. A few weeks ago, I spoke about Bill C-2, which was introduced by the government with goals similar to those of the bill before us. I expressed my deep concerns with many portions of Bill C-2, including the parts that would allow Canada Post to open any mail without a warrant, ban certain cash payments and transactions, allow warrantless access to personal information, and let the government snoop on people's online activities and see deeply personal financial information from Canadian banks.

While this new piece of legislation, Bill C-12, is intended to address many of the thoughts that I, many of my Conservative colleagues and indeed people from all across Canada had about that old bill, I am grateful that the government listened to our Conservative ideas and the voices of thousands of Canadians, including people in my community, to remove these problematic elements. This proves that the work Conservatives are doing in Ottawa is producing results for the people we serve. Legislation about border security should be about keeping our borders safe, not about completely separate topics like online surveillance, private business transactions and reading people's mail.

Bill C-12 is a small step in the right direction, but it is not without problems. I am really glad that the sections encroaching on Canadians' personal freedoms and privacy rights are no longer in the bill, but let us talk about what else is not in the bill. There is still no action to end Liberal catch-and-release policies, meaning people who smuggle drugs and guns across our borders can still be arrested, get released and go right back to breaking the law all in the same day. The Liberals are still allowing people who get arrested for the most serious crimes to serve what should be multi-year sentences in the comfort of their own homes. There are still no mandatory minimum prison times for fentanyl traffickers, gangsters who commit gun crimes and other heinous offenders.

This soft-on-crime agenda is not just an abstract idea; it is hitting home in my community every single day. Last week, there was a shooting on Dellgrove Circle and Baintree Way. A couple of months ago, bullets struck a home on Park Avenue and Grant Street. Back in June, a house on Roseview Avenue was targeted with six gunshots in broad daylight. These are not supposed to be dangerous places. They are quiet neighbourhoods where families should feel safe. My neighbours in Cambridge did not ask for their streets to become crime scenes. Ten years ago, this would have been unimaginable in a country like Canada and in a community like ours. These are not just headlines; they are real families, real neighbours and real lives disrupted by violence. Every time I hear about another incident, I think of the children growing up in fear and the parents wondering if their street is still safe.

People reach out to me constantly in emails, phone calls, texts and responses to my community surveys. They tell me, “I don't feel safe when I lock the door at night or when I let my kids play out in the yard.” They asked me to bring their concerns to the government. I have stood up time and time again in debate and in question period to let the government know just how badly it is failing law-abiding citizens.

What does the Liberal government say in response? For years, the Liberals said, “Hold on, be patient, the legislation is coming soon”; that is, when they did not call us racist, conspiracy theorists or supporters of so-called American-style policies.

For this government, it has always been about doing something tomorrow instead of doing it today, about blaming someone else instead of taking ownership. The Liberals had an opportunity to fix the justice system in this very piece of legislation. They did not. The bail reform could already be reported out of committee by now. It is not; it is just getting started.

The Liberals had an opportunity to vote for Conservative legislation to put the bad guys in jail and end Liberal bail. They did not. They have ignored this problem for years; they have ignored the police officers, the mayors and the frontline workers. People in communities like mine are paying the price. Every day the government delays is another day criminals are allowed to break the law with absolute impunity, no deterrents, no consequences and no accountability. That needs to stop now.

Let us not forget who else is paying the price for this soft-on-crime, hug-a-thug approach: our emergency services, frontline workers, first responders and hospitals. Police are being stretched thin responding to repeat offenders who should never have been released in the first place. Paramedics are racing from one overdose call to the next, often with no time to recover between emergencies. Nurses and doctors are overwhelmed treating the fallout of drug poisonings, violent assaults and mental health crises, many of which could have been prevented if the justice system actually worked.

Our first responders are doing their jobs with courage and compassion, but are being asked to do more with less. They are expected to manage the consequences of failed policies while the government continues to delay action and deflect responsibility. When the system fails to hold criminals accountable, it does not hurt just victims, but everyone who is trying to keep our communities safe and healthy. It puts pressure on our hospitals, shelters, outreach workers and emergency services. It creates burnout, frustration and fear. These are the people we rely on in our most vulnerable moments. They deserve more than lip service; they deserve a system that works. They deserve a government that stands with them, not one that leaves them to clean up the mess.

While crime continues to rise, it is not the only crisis gripping our communities; the opioid epidemic is another tragedy unfolding in plain sight and one the government continues to mishandle. We see people living in tents in what used to be public parks and green spaces. We see people in doorways, on the sidewalk or the street corner who have lost everything they had because of one mistake. We hear the sirens of ambulances going to help someone who has had yet another overdose. Many people do not make it out alive.

These are not statistics; these are people who get a government in Ottawa that does not offer a helping hand or invest in recovery and treatment, a government that wilfully pushes hard drugs onto our streets through so-called safe supply sites.

There is nothing safe about a government-funded institution that hands out drugs that can literally kill people, all for free. These so-called safe supply sites do not just keep vulnerable people hooked on the poison that is killing them; they also feed the opioid crisis even more because many of the drugs they give away end up on the streets. The health minister testified in front of a parliamentary committee just days ago that not only would she not commit to ending this radical experiment, she would not even commit to ensuring these sites are not placed next to places like schools in our community. That means a safe supply site in a city like mine could be put right around the corner from kids who are literally four or five years old.

It seems like now everywhere has become a drug consumption site. I hear stories from parents who find needles and drug materials in parks and playgrounds, places we never would have dreamed of finding any of these things in just a few years ago. I find it a bit ironic that this bill is supposed to address the fentanyl flowing across our borders, all while the government continues to hand it out here at home and defend a regime that we all know has failed and is failing so many. If we truly want to stop the opioid crisis, then let us stop all the opioids, including the ones the government gives out for free in communities across Canada.

Concerns like these are ones my colleagues and I hope to address at upcoming committee hearings through amendments offered in good faith. We want to make this legislation stronger and better, because stronger legislation means better outcomes for the people we serve.

I would say to the people of my community that they should know that I have one goal in this debate: to keep our communities safe and to finally put a stop to the scourge of crime, chaos, drugs and disorder that is sweeping across—

[The Deputy Speaker, Tom Kmiec]

Questions and comments, the hon. member for Cape Spear.

[Tom Osborne, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Treasury Board]

Mr. Speaker, I listened intently to the member's speech, and I have one question for her.

The member said that first responders deserve a government that stands behind them. Has she called on her leader to apologize to the RCMP, as he called into question its integrity and reputation, and said it did not do their job, or does she stand behind him?

[Connie Cody, Conservative, Cambridge, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the member opposite really needs to look in his own backyard and at his own government.

Today, at the public safety and national security committee, the public safety minister doubled down on calling the RCMP racist. If that member wants to be serious about supporting police officers, then maybe the Liberals should back up that tough talk by voting for our Conservative legislation, which police unions from coast to coast to coast have been asking for for years, instead of voting against it at every opportunity.

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry—Soulanges—Huntingdon, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I listened closely to my colleague's speech.

Can she give me her opinion on the fact that Bill C-12 proposes to integrate the Coast Guard under the defence umbrella, under the umbrella of the Canadian Armed Forces, yet there are no plans to arm the Coast Guard? Does my colleague believe that our Coast Guard is genuinely being integrated into the military?

[Connie Cody, Conservative, Cambridge, ON]

Mr. Speaker, there is a lot that is happening right now that is nothing more than a smokescreen for our current government.

The things she mentioned are no different than hiring 1,000 CBSA officers when the agency can barely deal with losses through attrition. When we open the Gordie Howe bridge next year, the shifting of personnel will leave a massive hole in the system. Plus, there is no training capacity for the 1,000 proposed officers. It is just more talk and no action from the Liberal government.

[Scott Anderson, Conservative, Vernon—Lake Country—Monashee, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I note that the Conservatives are the only ones delivering speeches on Bill C-12 and that the only rebuttal Liberals have is an irrelevancy that has nothing to do with Bill C-12.

What does my colleague think? Is it that, now that the only provisions that allow the government to control Canadians have been removed, the Liberals simply do not care about Bill C-12?

[Connie Cody, Conservative, Cambridge, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I think the Liberals are running out of policies to steal from the Conservatives.

It is deeply disheartening to see the Liberals not put up any speakers to defend their own bill, despite the fact that they are supposedly so proud of it. Even with the changes we forced the government to make, the bill still has deep flaws, as I outlined in my speech.

I look forward to working with my colleagues in the Bloc and across the way to work through the legislation to further fix this government bill to ensure Canadians' rights are being protected.