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

[Jeff Kibble, Conservative, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to rise on behalf of the great people of Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, on the south end of Vancouver Island.

If I may, I will take a moment to recognize a very special person, Winnie Sifert, who completed 40 years of service to the City of Langford, including as a city councillor. It was my honour to attend a park renaming in her honour in Langford.

My question is specific to part 4 and the Oceans Act. I was happy to hear the member opposite discuss that operations need to get more sophisticated. He said the Coast Guard has all the skills and equipment it needs, but it would now be tasked under the Oceans Act to conduct security and surveillance patrols. I was previously in charge of the regional joint operations centre, and I understand surveillance operations in the military intimately.

Presently, those in the Coast Guard have only navigation radars and civilian radios, and other than for predator control, they are unarmed. How do the Liberals intend to have the Coast Guard conduct surveillance missions to collect, process and disseminate secure tactical data? Will the Liberals be arming the Coast Guard to complete these missions and properly train them, per this bill?

[Jacques Ramsay, Liberal, La Prairie—Atateken, QC]

Mr. Speaker, first of all, it is important to remember that the Canadian Coast Guard falls under the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, but now it will also fall under a second department in accordance with the bill. We will therefore be able to assess the budgets needed to complete operations.

Having said that, we have full confidence in the Coast Guard. It has already proven that it is capable of doing the job with the tools that it has right now. If equipment is needed, then we will certainly make sure it is provided. This is part of the investments that Canada wants to make to keep Canadians safe.

[Jean-Denis Garon, Bloc, Mirabel, QC]

Mr. Speaker, Bill C‑12 is the new version of Bill C‑2, with fewer irritants.

The reason we have Bill C‑12 before us today is that there has been a huge backlash in civil society against Bill C‑2 and the privacy violations it entailed, particularly with respect to the police opening mail. This led to the introduction of Bill C‑12, which is much more balanced. Many of the irritants that bothered us, the Conservatives and civil society have been removed. That is why we are able to work on it again today.

I would like my colleague to tell me whether he thinks that this type of work, namely reintroducing a bill when the opposition parties speak for civil society, is one of the advantages of having a minority government.

[Jacques Ramsay, Liberal, La Prairie—Atateken, QC]

Mr. Speaker, of course, the work done here helps improve bills. Naturally, we are listening. We in the Liberal Party of Canada are quite proud, actually. We pride ourselves on listening to civil society, putting opinions to good use and, as necessary, improving our bills.

We have not given up on the measures left out of Bill C‑12 but retained in Bill C‑2. We believe them to be necessary. We believe that we need to fight transnational gangs, illegal weapons smuggling and drug trafficking effectively. We are definitely prepared to do so in accordance with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. We are the party of the charter.

[Julie Dzerowicz, Liberal, Davenport, ON]

Mr. Speaker, in my downtown riding of Davenport, in west Toronto, the stealing of cars is a very big issue. Our government has put in quite a bit of investment to tackle it. We have seen great progress.

Could the hon. member talk about how the bill would continue to help us have the tools we need to make sure we keep our communities safe and that these cars are not stolen from our homes?

[Jacques Ramsay, Liberal, La Prairie—Atateken, QC]

Mr. Speaker, that is a very good question. We are currently seeing a 20% to 25% decrease in auto thefts. At the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security, we had an opportunity to hear all the stakeholders explain things to us. They told us that what was needed most was co-operation and collaboration.

Bill C‑12 will ensure that all stakeholders have all the relevant information on a need-to-know basis to more effectively fight the national scourge that is auto theft. We need to take action, and we will be there.

[Julie Dzerowicz, Liberal, Davenport, ON]

Mr. Speaker, as always, it is a true pleasure for me to rise in the House to speak on behalf of the amazing residents and constituents of my constituency of Davenport. I will be speaking today to Bill C-12, an act respecting certain measures relating to the security of Canada's borders and the integrity of the Canadian immigration system and respecting other related security measures.

Bill C-12 would make critical amendments that would keep Canadians safe and secure by providing law enforcement with the resources to disrupt increasingly complex criminal groups, by strengthening border security and by improving our immigration system while protecting privacy rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Of course, this legislation builds on a $1.3-billion investment in border security.

Before I go further, I want to recognize that we are gathered today on the traditional and unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe people.

Whenever I am examining new legislation, I often ask myself a series of questions: Who is going to benefit from the bill? How will the legislation improve our immigration programs and services for newcomers? Will it improve government services and support? In reviewing the proposed amendments for the strengthening Canada's immigration system and borders act, Bill C-12, I believe the answers are yes, yes and yes.

I believe this legislation strikes the right balance. It would improve how the government serves Canadians, newcomers and those seeking Canada's protection. The bill would also strengthen our security and safety, would support our economic growth with a more efficient and effective system, and would improve communication and co-operation among federal, provincial and territorial governments.

The measures proposed in this bill are designed to improve our immigration and asylum systems to better meet the needs of our country and those needing our protection. It fits with our commitment to a more sustainable immigration system that is aligned with our capacity to absorb, employ and house newcomers.

Canadians want our country's asylum system to uphold our proud humanitarian tradition and continue to be a beacon of hope and opportunity to the world's most vulnerable. At the same time, Canadians do not want our resources to be devoted to people who attempt to shortcut our immigration processes or abuse the generosity of our communities for their own personal gain.

The legislation before us proposes a reasonable balance to managing claims for asylum, either at the border or in Canada, and would appropriately refer claims to the Immigration and Refugee Board for a decision. The bill would also improve the management of the asylum system with enhanced efficiencies in processing claims. For example, creating a single, online application process would make applications simpler and help with information sharing across the appropriate departments and agencies. This would make sure that cases are decision-ready when they are referred to the Immigration and Refugee Board. That would benefit asylum claimants waiting to know if they are eligible for Canada's protection.

Under the legislation, the federal government would change how it manages specific asylum claims, including claims made more than one year after someone's first arrival in Canada, after June 24, 2020, and claims made by those who irregularly enter Canada, make a claim 14 or more days later and effectively avoid returning to the U.S. under the safe third country agreement. People will always be able to submit claims, which would not change with this legislation, and claims would not be dismissed. The claims would instead be referred to our fair and comprehensive removal process, which includes the ability to seek a pre-removal risk assessment. This would help reduce pressure on the asylum system and protect it against sudden increases in claims, while ensuring fair and fast consideration of claims of risk.

These new rules would streamline the claims process. This would benefit asylum claimants, who right now are waiting way too long to have their cases reviewed and decided. Some of these people may have fled their home countries to live in a democratic and free country. They may have left to seek religious freedom. They may have come to Canada to live their preferred gender or identity. If they have made it to Canada and made an asylum claim, we want their claim to be processed in a timely and fair manner.

The measures in the bill would also support a closer working relationship between the federal government and the provinces and territories. Under the current legislation, the federal government shares some information, but gaps in our legal framework mean we often have to do so on a case-by-case basis.

It means that we would update sharing provisions to provide information on immigration, citizenship and passports to clients sooner. This would help all orders of government and our domestic partners to work together to get newcomers the services they need faster. I understand that this has been a request from our partners for some time.

We know that provinces and territories deliver so many of the important, on-the-ground services that newcomers, including asylum claimants, rely upon. In collaboration with the federal government and with our support, they provide much-needed access to health care and social programs. They are an important partner in the process of welcoming and integrating newcomers. Providing current and accurate information is essential for any productive partnership.

Finally, I would like to say that the bill would improve how we would work together to better protect Canadians. At the end of the day, a main priority of Parliament and all orders of government is the safety and security of our citizens and residents.

In recent years, we have seen human smugglers and organized crime groups attempt to guide people across our borders through irregular points of entry. The legislation, if passed, would propose that those trying to shortcut our immigration process by crossing irregularly into Canada and making an asylum claim would have their claims referred to the CBSA and not the Immigration and Refugee Board.

There have been concerns raised that people are using multiple identities or different names to access benefits in Canada. This is simply not acceptable. By improving our information sharing among partners, we would help clarify the identity of anyone seeking to defraud our systems. The legislation also proposes that only hearing-ready claims would be forwarded for review by the Immigration and Refugee Board. That would give national security and law enforcement the time needed to conduct thorough background checks, confirm identities and examine any potential links to criminal history or activities.

Together, these measures would reassure Canadians that our systems are effective and that our borders are secure. That would help improve trust in our immigration system. I see clear benefits coming out of the legislation, benefits to our country's immigration system, including supporting the more efficient work of the federal government and all levels of government, and improving services for Canadians and newcomers. It would streamline decision-making, reduce efforts to bypass our migration programs and rules, and improve collaboration across all levels of government.

Rest assured, the bill is a key part of the government's forward-looking agenda. I urge my fellow hon. members from all sides of the House to join me in supporting the important legislation today.

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

Mr. Speaker, I represent the Similkameen—South Okanagan—West Kootenay riding and we have one of the longest borders along the United States and, also, the most mountainous terrain. We are having difficulty, right now, getting enough RCMP officers and meeting the quota that we have right now. We are not able to meet the quota because not enough people are applying at Depot. We all know that they are not applying, so we cannot get enough for the needs we have right now.

How does the member believe that we are going to hire 1,000 more RCMP officers when we cannot get what we need right now?

[Julie Dzerowicz, Liberal, Davenport, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I think that is a very valid question.

I will say that, in addition to our wanting to hire 1,000 more RCMP officers and 1,000 more CBSA officers, we have put in an additional $1.3 billion. I do think that if we could provide the right tools and the right package, if we could provide the right opportunities, we would have an easy ability to be able to fill those existing roles. It is an important job. I know that Canadians will want to step up and help protect Canadians.

[Luc Thériault, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

Mr. Speaker, as everyone knows, the debates we have here can help us develop and draft the best bill possible, but if we fail to ensure it is effective in the real world, it becomes a bad law. The Customs and Immigration Union tells us that we need somewhere between 2,000 and 3,000 more border officers to keep the borders secure.

Will my colleague join us in our efforts to make this happen and ensure that this bill rises above mere lip service?

[Julie Dzerowicz, Liberal, Davenport, ON]

Mr. Speaker, we were first elected over 10 years ago. My 10-year anniversary was yesterday and it continues to be the honour of my life to represent the amazing Davenport residents. When we were first elected, the Conservatives had decreased the amount of money that was going to our border officers by about $1 billion. Over the course of a number of years, we brought that money back and, on top of that, there is $1.3 billion in additional money.

We have introduced bills like Bill C-12, and we have done it in collaboration with a number of stakeholders, including CBSA officers. This bill is formed with much of their feedback in mind. We have every intention of continuing to support them so we can ensure that, if this bill is passed, it is enforced properly.

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

Mr. Speaker, to pick up on the last question, the legislation is one very important aspect in terms of what the new Prime Minister has brought forward, but another important component is the budgetary issue. There is close to a $1-billion commitment and 1,000 new border security officers, not to mention the 1,000 new RCMP officers.

I am wondering if the member could provide her thoughts regarding why it is important, as a new government and Prime Minister, to provide not only legislation but also a budgetary response to the need.

[Julie Dzerowicz, Liberal, Davenport, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have been listening to the debate this afternoon. One of the things we have to remind ourselves is that it is like the whole world has completely shifted. There is a new global environment. There are now increasingly sophisticated criminal organizations. There is now a renewed international focus on irregular migration and cross-border crime. There are a lot of new things happening. In these days when there are so many changes happening around the world, we have to be very effective with the dollars we have.

I am very proud that our government, over the last 10 years, has not only invested about $1 billion in the border but has now made a number of legislative proposals to ensure the right legislation is in place to allow CBSA and RCMP officers to do their work. They have provided input into this bill. We have invested another $1.3 billion to ensure they have the resources they need. This is good value for money and we are working very closely with our international partners.

[Brad Redekopp, Conservative, Saskatoon West, SK]

Mr. Speaker, it is my honour to stand here today on behalf of the citizens of Saskatoon West and speak to this bill, Bill C-12. I am going to speak mainly about the immigration aspects of this bill today.

The first thing that comes to mind when I look at this bill is to question why we are here. What is it that has caused all this to happen? The member who just spoke mentioned changes that she thought happened. In reality, they were not things imposed upon us so much as they were created by the Liberal government. There are many things happening in our immigration system, at our borders and with crime in our country that can be traced directly to actions by the Liberal government over the last 10 years.

If we go back to the previous Harper government, there were some very strong measures in place, such as mandatory minimums and consecutive police sentences. Police had the power to actually give consequences to criminals. Colleagues should know that crime was down. If they picture a V, when the Conservatives were in power before, violent crime was dropping, just like this side of the V. It was dropping significantly.

Mysteriously, when the Liberals took over, violent crime went back up. Why? It was due to all of the changes they made to the laws that were lenient on criminals. Those were some of the things that were done. It was not that they were imposed on us from an outside force. Those changes had real consequences for the people of Saskatoon West. Now here we are with the government trying to fix something that it created in the first place, so do not be fooled by what we are hearing today. This is a cleanup of a mess that was made by the government.

I want to talk about immigration. As I start, I want to just highlight something I have noticed online and in communications I have had with people, Canadian voters, which is a bit of a disturbing trend of attitude toward newcomers, immigrants, in our country. As I said, there are a lot of problems, for sure. Everybody knows that our immigration system has many problems. We have a lot of crime in our country in general. We also have problems at our borders. There are lots of problems in Canada.

Our immigration system is quite broken at the moment, for sure, but that does not mean it is the fault of newcomers to our country. I think that all of us in this room and anyone watching need to be reminded that unless someone is an indigenous person in this country, that they are an immigrant. We all come from that background. My grandparents were immigrants to this country, so I guess I would be a second-generation born in Canada, which makes me a third-generation immigrant in Canada. I am sure many of us have the same story.

It is really important to remember that what is happening in our country right now in immigration is not the fault of newcomers who have come here. It all started back in 2017 when then prime minister Justin Trudeau made his famous tweet that basically said, “Welcome to Canada”. That told people all around the world that Canada wanted everybody to come here. Guess what happened? People responded. Many people came. They responded by selling their homes and leaving their families, by leaving everything behind and coming to Canada because Canada wanted them. The prime minister himself said that Canada wanted them. In reality, former prime minister Justin Trudeau did that without having any clue as to how he was going to deal with that, how many people were going to respond and what would happen to those who responded.

I come back to the broken system that we have now. If a person is feeling anger toward immigration in our country, that anger needs to be directed where it belongs, to the Liberal government that was in power and still is in power. The Liberal government had the chance to set the rules. In some cases it chose to not make rules. It set the numbers. It decided how many millions of people could come in as temporary residents. The government invited people in peril, like people from Hong Kong, Ukraine and Sudan, to come to Canada.

In fact, just this morning I was reading a story about a family from Ukraine who has been here for a number of years through the CUAET program and now the family members are having trouble getting their visas, getting anything moving forward. In the story it says the humanitarian and compassionate stream, which is where Ukrainian people would fit in, faces waits of up to 50 years. It also says that for caregivers it is up to nine years, for the agri-food stream it is 19 years and for entrepreneurs under the start-up visa stream it is 35 years. These are ridiculous numbers. How can somebody who was invited to come to our country expect to wait 50 years to get permanent residency in our country? That is part of the brokenness that we see in this system.

Of course, the Liberal government created this mixed up immigration system. It used to be a very clean system in which we were looking for people with skills to bring to our country, in addition to family members and in addition to asylum seekers and refugee claimants. It was based on skills primarily, and now that has been changed to include all kinds of other political things in the numbers, so that people are admitted to Canada not just because of their skills but also because of other reasons that have nothing to do with their talents or their skills.

Of course we all know what has happened in our temporary resident population, whether it is temporary foreign workers or students. There were absolutely no checks on the number of students coming into our country, and as a result, people took advantage of the system. Colleges took advantage of the system. There were many unscrupulous immigration consultants who took advantage of the system.

Ultimately, regarding refugees and asylum seekers, the system collapsed. There were so many people coming in that the system just could not handle it. Even with some increases that were made by the government, we ended up with ridiculous wait times of four years or longer for asylum claimants in Canada. This is the system that the Liberals created in Canada, so anyone who feels any negativity toward immigration in our country needs to put that on the Liberal government. The Liberals are the ones who created it.

Michael Barutciski from the MacDonald-Laurier Institute said this: “The explosion in asylum claims post-Roxham is the result of two simultaneous policy decisions: (1) loosening the criteria for visa issuance and (2) allowing visa-free travel for potential asylum seekers...our quiet asylum crisis is largely a self-inflicted problem.”

Of course, right on cue, the people looking to profit from these kinds of situations marched right in. There are fake immigration consultants or immigration consultants who bent the rules to make a lot of money from the situation. Human traffickers are literally bringing people into our country to work, to make money off their backs. That is human trafficking. Employers are taking advantage of temporary workers, and people were able to set up fake colleges and make lots of money off the backs of people coming into our country. At the end of the day, it was all about money. There was a lot of money to be made through the messed up system that was created by the government.

Now here we are with Bill C-12, which is trying to fix some of this, and it would fix the big mess that was created by the government.

Similarly, border security has become a big problem in our country. Everybody remembers Roxham Road. Roxham Road should have been a wall. People should not have been able to cross at Roxham Road, but instead it was convenient, because there was a road from New York and a road from Quebec, so people started crossing at Roxham Road, and the government could have simply stopped that. It could have put up a little fence. It could have discouraged people from coming across, but instead it put RCMP and CBSA officers there and essentially asked them to help people come into Canada.

They had a strange thing to say to them: “You are not allowed to cross here, but may I help you come into Canada?” How did that make any sense? They were literally helping people, carrying their luggage and bringing them across the border. Once in Canada, they were given pretty good treatment as asylum seekers. In fact, in that area it became very common for taxis to drop people off. They would come across the road, and a whole industry popped up on the Canadian side of the border related to newcomers coming into our country.

Essentially, our RCMP and CBSA officers became “welcome to Canada” greeters, and more and more people came. This is what happens when we have a broken system.

Even on other parts of our border, there is a tremendous lack of technology. There is technology today that can scan containers and find what is in them; it can see exactly what is there, yet we have very little of this technology. We have not invested where we need to invest, and we do not have the people to do the checks that need to be done. As a result, a lot of stolen vehicles are coming into our country through container loads. There are a lot of drugs, and also the precursor chemicals that are used to make drugs, coming in unchecked, because we are doing a very poor job of checking what is coming into our country.

Of course, there are guns. There are a lot of illegal guns coming across the border that are used in crimes in Canada, and we should be checking more of those things, which we are not doing, so there is a gap in our system that has not been corrected by the government but needs to be.

There is fairly unorganized enforcement of our border. There are a lot of agencies. There is the Canada Border Services Agency, CBSA; the RCMP; the immigration department, IRCC; the Immigration and Refugee Board, IRB; and the Coast Guard, among others, that patrol and monitor our border. It is not the members, the hard-working men and women who work for these organizations, who are the problem, but there is a lot of disorganization in these organizations. There is a lack of resources and even a lack of information sharing. These groups are not really allowed, because of privacy legislation, to share information from one organization to another, so we end up with a lot of duplicated work that is needed in order to solve crimes.

These are just some of the things that are missing in the system that we currently have, which is the system that has been created and fine-tuned by the Liberal government.

Last week, there was a very funny tweet, I thought. With all the problems of drugs and all the other things that are going on at the border, such as the illegal guns coming across and even human trafficking, what the Canada Border Services Agency is focused on, or at least last week was focused on, is this: “We’re taking action to protect our economy. CBSA is investigating whether certain imports of disposable paper plates, bowls, and platters from China are being sold at unfair prices in Canada (dumped) or subsidized.” This is the priority of CBSA today, with all the other things that are happening. It is embarrassing for me as a Canadian to see that.

Of course, surveillance at the border is not happening to any significant degree. The government made a big story about buying a couple of helicopters. Well, a couple of helicopters on a 7,000-kilometre border does not do a whole lot, and there is so much more than could be done with surveillance.

What happens? Organized criminals step in, which is the really negative aspect, because they see an opportunity to make money. International crime rings and cartels are using Canada as a base of operations for them to do all their nasty things and make a lot of money off us, and not just us, but off the U.S. as well. Drug smugglers are smuggling drugs into Canada and then into other countries from here. I spoke about gun smuggling, which is a huge market that happens at our border, as well as human trafficking. We should be severely focused on curtailing and stopping all of these things.

RCMP chief superintendent and director general, serious and organized crime and border integrity, Mathieu Bertrand, said, “We are aware that they [cartels] are a source of a lot of the illicit goods coming into Canada. These organized crime groups, whether they be in Canada or abroad, are using Canada as a trans-shipment point. Those groups…are very much involved in crime impacting Canada.” I think that says it all, which is that a lot of the source of the crime comes from our lack of properly defending our border.

Of course, money laundering is another thing that happens in Canada regularly because we lack the tools and the ability to really see what is happening in that world.

As a result of all that, there is surging crime in Canada. We have heard this story many times. I spoke at the beginning about violent crime's decreasing over the Harper years, and then, in the Liberal years, it has gone right back up again because of the actions the Liberals have taken. Crime is up significantly under the Liberal government. Gang murders have doubled, and violent crime is up over 39%. The actions taken by the government have weakened the laws and effectively protected the criminal.

For example, Bill C-5 eliminated mandatory minimum sentences. As we look at the crimes that are being committed in our cities, and I see it in Saskatoon all the time, we see that there are very few consequences, if any, anymore for committing crimes. This has emboldened criminals. It has emboldened gangs to get young people involved in crime, because they know there are no consequences for committing those crimes.

This is partly because of Bill C-5 where the mandatory minimums were taken away for significant offences such as human trafficking, drug trafficking, car theft and assault with a weapon. The list goes on. These are things for which the Liberal government chose to take away mandatory sentences, and as a result, there have been increases in these kinds of crimes. I guess the Liberals wanted to put criminals first and not put Canadians first. We need to restore mandatory sentences to put consequences for criminals back into the system.

The other bill that made a big change is Bill C-75. Bill C-75 basically promoted house arrest. It essentially made it very difficult to put someone in jail. As a result, people are out on bail. That is why we talk about people getting bail instead of jail. We want to make sure that people actually go to jail and not always get bail. This is part of the catch-and-release problem that we have in our country, where people get arrested for a crime, are charged with a crime, get out on bail and can repeat an offence. We see it very often in many cities in our country.

Repeat offenders simply walk free. They do not have any consequences. As I said, it just encourages them to keep doing what they are doing. It encourages gangs to keep recruiting new members, and it does not stop new members of gangs from committing crimes. That is why we want to bring back jail, not bail. We want to make sure that, particularly for repeat offenders, there are consequences to those crimes and that the offenders actually do spend some time in jail to slow the process of crime that is happening.

I just want to mention that we often hear the term “bail reform” from the government. I want to talk about that for a minute. We have to go back to what actually happened. Bail reform happened about 10 years ago, when the Liberal government came in. It implemented bail reform, and these are things I just described. Now, all of a sudden, the Liberals have finally woken up and realized that this is not working. Canadians have been telling them that for years, and they are finally realizing it. Now the Liberals want to do so-called bail reform.

Really what the Liberals are doing is fixing the mess they made with bail reform in the first place. What we are doing now is not bail reform; it is correcting the system, taking it back to the way it was, to actually having consequences for people who are committing crimes.

Of course drugs fuel crime, and that is part of the problem at our border. As I mentioned, drugs are flowing across the border shockingly freely. This has caused a big drug problem in our country. We all see it in our cities. I see it in Saskatoon. I am sure other members see it in their own cities.

Part of that is from the permissive harm reduction regime that has been promoted by the government. In fact, from what I have seen, it creates a cycle of dependence. In many ways, it is best compared to a palliative care kind of approach to dealing with people who have addiction issues, and it is not working. Safe supply has resulted in more deaths and more crime. The number of people on the streets who are involved in illicit drug use and in crime is just going up.

Instead of encouraging drug use by providing free needles, free hard drugs and all the other government programs, Conservatives believe drug users need a recovery-based system of care. We need to be compassionate with these people. They need help. We need to move them forward on the continuum of care so that they can actually get out of the situation they are in, not just allow them to remain there.

We need to bring home safe streets, schools and communities.

Just to sum up, we are talking about this today because of the failure of the Liberal government over the last 10 years. It is now trying to fix the mess it has created. It is trying to fix the broken immigration system, where we have backlogs that have exploded, where the focus on skilled workers has been lost, where the loopholes are wide open and where we have consultants, colleges and employers taking advantage of the system we have. There have been seven immigration ministers in 10 years. That is crazy.

The government is also trying to fix the chaos at the border. It has lost control of our borders. Illegal crossings are up, and enforcement is down. There are more shipments of stolen vehicles. Drugs and precursors to drugs are coming across the borders, and firearms are coming across the borders illegally. There is a surge of crime in our country, with violent crime and gang activity rising, and the soft-on-crime laws are allowing offenders to walk free.

We have a plan to fix immigration and to speed up processing for skilled workers. We want to secure the border by closing illegal crossings and restoring order to the border. We want to crack down on crime by reintroducing mandatory jail time, ending catch-and-release and backing our police to make sure that we keep our communities safe. That is our plan.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, John Nater]

It is my duty pursuant to Standing Order 38 to inform the House that the questions to be raised tonight at the time of adjournment are as follows: the hon. member for Saanich—Gulf Islands, International Trade; the hon. member for Elgin—St. Thomas—London South, Justice; and the hon. member for Regina—Lewvan, Housing.