Mr. Speaker, securing our borders is not a luxury. It is a matter of urgency. For a long time now, the Bloc Québécois has been calling for strong measures to combat the export of stolen vehicles, the increase in asylum claims, the fentanyl crisis and money laundering. However, the situation had to become critical before the government would think about taking any action. After nearly 10 years of complacency, now the government is acting like a pyromaniac firefighter. It did nothing to prevent the fires, and now it wants to rush in and pretend to be the saviour putting out the flames. Yes, some measures have been taken, such as closing Roxham Road, albeit too late, and some announcements have been made about tackling organized crime. However, let us be honest. It was never enough, and never sustainable. It was too often improvised, and more importantly, it was dictated by Washington.
The goal was clearly stated in the Speech from the Throne, specifically, to rebuild public trust in the immigration system and in border security. However, Bill C-2 falls very short of that. This bill seems to be designed less to reassure Quebeckers and Canadians and more to respond to pressure from the United States, in the midst of a tariff war where Donald Trump is using migration and fentanyl as a pretext for taking trade measures.
Members will recall the fiasco of Roxham Road. For years, Ottawa tolerated an irregular crossing that overwhelmed our services. Instead of fixing the problem quickly, it allowed the situation to escalate. The result is that Quebec paid the price but did not receive sufficient compensation. This is why we doubt the government's ability to keep its new promises. Yes, Bill C‑2 includes some useful measures, but it is important to bear in mind that, without additional staff on the ground, the border will remain porous.
Take customs, for example. Bill C‑2 will finally allow officers at the Canada Border Services Agency to demand facilities for inspecting goods intended for export. For too long, they have been telling us that they cannot open containers at the port of Montreal because they do not have the warrants and facilities to do so. This will be fixed, and it is a step forward.
What are people on the ground saying? The Customs and Immigration Union estimates that it would need another 2,000 to 3,000 officers to get the current job done. The government promised 1,000 new RCMP officers and 1,000 new CBSA officers. The Speech from the Throne did mention RCMP officers, but it did not mention CBSA officers at all. That is why the Bloc Québécois keeps raising this issue. Those officers have to actually be deployed. Without boots on the ground, the new measures will be meaningless.
It is the same issue with Canada Post. Bill C‑2 removes some of the legal barriers to mail inspection. However, in my riding of Rimouski—La Matapédia, for example, we already have problems with postal services. In some municipalities, mail is only delivered every other day. A recent staffing shortage even resulted in no mail delivery for several days. If workers are already stretched thin, how can they be expected to do more? These are the government's true colours: it offers promises but no resources, laws but no officers, and heavier workloads but no support.
Another important aspect of Bill C-2 has to do with immigration and asylum claims. Vigilance is essential. Bill C-2 gives the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship the power to override his own officials' decisions before a case is referred to the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada. In other words, the minister becomes both judge and jury. That gives one person too much power with not enough safeguards. Let us be clear. If the government wants to rebuild public trust, it needs to demonstrate transparency, predictability and respect for Quebec's jurisdictions. Once again, we have a government that is centralizing decision-making in Ottawa and giving the minister discretionary powers without any real checks and balances. That does not build trust; it destroys it. The Bloc Québécois will be clear: Quebec must continue to have its say on the number of refugees it can comfortably accommodate. We are already taking on more than our share compared to the other provinces. Ottawa should compensate Quebec instead of leaving it to bear this burden alone.
Certain provisions also raise legal questions. For example, the bill prevents the minister and the minister's staff from being compelled to appear before the Refugee Protection Division. Is that consistent with transparency and accountability? The committee will have to answer that question.
The bill also provides that affected individuals may apply for a pre-removal risk assessment. However, I should point out that several countries, such as Haiti, are subject to a moratorium. In those cases, the actual scope of this mechanism is limited. Even the government recognizes that the bill raises legal issues. The proof is that it put out a charter statement in an attempt to justify them. We are going to demand that every clause be examined through that lens.
Again, it is important to recognize that this bill is a step in the right direction. Clause 77 would allow for the cancellation of fraudulent student visas obtained on the basis of fake admission letters. In the wake of the recent scandals, urgent action was needed to protect honest students and the integrity of our universities. The new grounds for inadmissibility will prevent a phantom student who is not attending classes from filing an asylum claim after one year. This practice is abusive and it must stop.
Finally, the end of the 14‑day exception in the safe third country agreement closes a loophole that encouraged irregular crossings and fuelled human smuggling networks. The government is finally taking action, but it is doing so unilaterally, without renegotiating the agreement. As a result, those intercepted after 14 days will be returned to their country of origin, unless it is a moratorium country. Evidently, the problem has not been completely resolved. On that point, it almost seems as if the government has taken inspiration from our own agenda. However, I will give it the benefit of the doubt.
The Bloc Québécois will vote in favour of passing Bill C-2 at second reading. To be clear, this is not a carte blanche endorsement. In committee, we will demand a clear hiring plan for the CBSA and the RCMP, call for CBSA officers to be able to patrol between border crossings to provide operational depth without replacing the RCMP, set limits on the minister's new powers to prevent Ottawa from encroaching on Quebec's jurisdiction, create humanitarian exceptions, including through the pre-removal risk assessment mechanism, and demand fair compensation for Quebec, which is already taking in a disproportionate share of asylum seekers.
The government says it wants to rebuild public trust in the immigration system. However, the government cannot rebuild trust by taking ad hoc measures intended to appease Washington and defuse the threat of tariffs. The government cannot rebuild trust by repeating past fiascoes, such as Roxham Road. It can only rebuild trust by making its system solid, predictable, fair and respectful toward Quebec. Bill C‑2 is a step in the right direction. That said, without sufficient staff, without guardrails and without respect for Quebec, the legislation will be incomplete. The Bloc Québécois will do its job, which is to curb excesses, demand results and defend Quebeckers' interests. In short, our guiding principle is to protect the border without trampling on rights and to respect Quebec’s choices.
