Madam Speaker, it is a real honour for me to rise in the House for the first time after the summer to speak to Bill C-2, the strong borders act. I am speaking on behalf of the residents of my constituency of Davenport, whom I am so honoured to represent for the fourth time.
The need for the legislation is as great today as it was when it was introduced in June, and I look forward to helping make the case for the bill. When we talk about strong borders, on this side of the House, we are not talking about building walls; we are talking about providing tools that would protect everyone in Canada from the kinds of threats we could not have imagined not that long ago.
Let us think of Bill C-2 as offering a tool kit. The tools in the bill are designed to protect us from organized crime, hostile state actors, human traffickers, money launderers and drug cartels. These are the people who are flooding our streets with fentanyl, sexually exploiting children online, smuggling people to our borders or trying to make dirty money clean. These are criminals, plain and simple, who are using every tool of modern technology to commit crimes.
Law enforcement is playing catch-up as criminals find new ways to exploit gaps in our system as quickly as we close the ones they were just using. Some call it playing whack-a-mole. We can argue over the finer points of what we should be doing, but there can be no argument at all over the need for immediate and urgent action. We on this side of the House believe that Bill C-2 is the action we must take to properly protect our borders and to move on multiple fronts. This explains why the bill touches on so many areas.
For example, we might not have the Oceans Act at the very top of our list for amending when thinking of the strong borders act, but by making adjustments and including it in the proposed legislation, if passed, the bill would allow the Coast Guard to conduct security patrols and collect, analyze and share information and intelligence for security purposes. This would help protect our maritime borders, especially in the Arctic.
Fentanyl traffickers both inside and outside Canada use Canada Post to move their lethal product. A tiny amount of fentanyl, mere milligrams, can kill someone. It also fits neatly into an envelope. Under the current Canada Post Corporation Act, it is illegal for that envelope to be opened. However, if Bill C-2 passes, it would change that. With the bill, law enforcement could go to a judge, obtain a warrant, and search and seize drugs such as fentanyl from Canada Post mail. With this change, Canada Post would be on exactly the same footing as the big courier companies, and criminals would lose an easy way to ship drugs.
This is a much-needed policy change. For criminals, borders are something to be ignored. Borders are an inconvenience. They add to the cost of doing business. Our job is to make borders real and to make sure criminals cannot hide behind our modern communication tools to conduct their business. For Canada, this means ensuring law enforcement can properly investigate those who would do us harm by creating a proper lawful access regime to allow law enforcement to respond to the challenges it faces from criminals.
The changes proposed in Bill C-2 would help bring our laws and policies in line with those of our allies, particularly in the Five Eyes alliance; they have had their own versions of some of the same tools for many years. It is important to remember that the Canadian version will be in keeping with Canadian values, consistent with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
There has been considerable public discussion about this issue since Bill C-2 was tabled, and I look forward to the debate in this venerable House over the coming hours and days.
There is one important element I want to highlight about our proposal. Some have argued that the lawful access regime being proposed is a major attack on privacy rights. I would argue that it is not. Rather, it is carefully structured to calibrate law enforcement's access to information with the nature of information being sought. For the vast majority of information requests, a judicial warrant is required. There are a couple of exceptions to that, but they are ones that I believe all sides of the House can support.
I will give a couple of examples. First, Bill C-2 clarifies the ability of law enforcement to use specific powers and seize specific information without a warrant in urgent, time-sensitive circumstances. One such circumstance would be the live and active abuse of a child. I am sure we can all agree that stopping the abuse of a child is an appropriate exercise of police authority.
The second and other instance is when police are trying to find basic information about someone as part of an investigation. This typically happens in the early stages of a police investigation. What we are talking about here is basic information, essentially something that responds to simple yes-or-no kinds of questions. What police would glean from the answer would allow them to go to a judge, seek a warrant and obtain more information. Again, the object of the exercise is to allow law enforcement to move at the same speed as the criminals they are pursuing. Due process is maintained, but speed is also critical for police when pursuing those who use digital tools to communicate.
The bill has many more elements, and we will be discussing them over the course of the debate today. Amendments to the proceeds of crime, the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act, the Sex Offender Information Registration Act, the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, the Criminal Code and the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, among others, all add up to a complete and compelling package of reforms that modernize our laws and protect us from those who would do us harm.
Bill C-2 builds on the work we began last December when we announced a $1.3-billion investment in border security. These additional investments are helping our law enforcement and intelligence agencies keep pace with transnational organized crime groups, which have become more sophisticated in their use of new technologies, such as drones, 3-D printers and encrypted communications, to carry out cross-border crimes.
Under our border plan, we are hiring more personnel and delivering more tools and resources, such as advanced technology, drones, surveillance equipment, canine teams, helicopters and more. We have also listed seven transnational organized crime groups as terrorist entities under the Criminal Code and are constantly monitoring to determine if more should be added. These listings allow us to take direct action against organized crime groups, such as by freezing their assets in Canada.
Canadians expect us to do everything we can to combat crime and keep people safe. It is our essential duty as a government. The bill is necessary, but we make no claims of perfection. The Minister of Public Safety has made it clear that the government is open to constructive amendments. I look forward to an equally constructive debate today.