Madam Speaker, I want to start by thanking all the constituents of Abbotsford—South Langley. I am honoured to be here representing my community today.

The citizens of my riding have been advocating for stronger laws and stronger borders. I appreciate that Bill C-2 is trying to tackle high crime rates, but the bill in its current form is unacceptable. It has taken 10 years for the Liberals to put it forward, and if it is passed, crime rates will continue to rise in our communities and individual freedoms will be bulldozed by the Liberal government.

My riding encompasses borders with the United States. The Sumas and Aldergrove border crossings fall within my riding. It is close to the Pacific Ocean ports as well.

In British Columbia, fentanyl continues to be devastating in all of our communities. According to Health Canada, close to 50,000 Canadians died from apparent opioid toxicity between January 2016 and June 2024. Of all accidental opioid deaths in the first half of 2024, 79% involved fentanyl. In November 2024, police uncovered a superlab in Langley, within my community, that was capable of producing multiple kilograms of fentanyl every single week.

Despite these alarming facts, the Liberal government refuses to fix Canada's broken jail system. Members of my community believe that those who are profiting from poisoning community members, especially the children within our communities, belong behind bars. If the government were serious about protecting our borders, our neighbours and the neighbourhoods within our communities, it would ensure that moving fentanyl into our communities carried real jail time.

This bill does not address any mandatory minimums. It would maintain house arrest for serious crimes and includes no minimum sentencing for those who commit sexual assault against children. Since 2015, sexual violations against children have gone up 118%. That is simply disgraceful. If families cannot protect their children and we here cannot protect our children, who will?

Bill C-2 demonstrates a larger issue in Canadian policy. The Liberal government will overlook serious crimes, including crimes against children, without any ramifications. If passed in its current state, Bill C-2 will allow criminals to keep taking advantage of Canadians. Crime rates for extortion and sex-related crimes are growing dramatically. We need to bring in real change, and we need it now.

If this so-called strong borders act was serious about protecting our borders, it would increase mandatory minimums for drug traffickers. Currently, the mandatory minimum is only one year. How could our borders be truly strong if those who are trafficking toxic drugs are not being punished properly? Drug traffickers are bringing death sentences to our communities. One year in jail is insulting to the victims of dangerous crimes. However, it is not surprising considering that the Liberal Party is the one that supported the decriminalization of fentanyl in my province.

Why is it that the more the government fails to address real criminality, the more it simultaneously increases the targeting of innocent law-abiding citizens? The reality is that Canada is desperate for tougher policies on crime. Since 2015, violent crime has gone up 50%. Homicides are up by 27%. Sexual assaults are up by 75%, and 90% of those are committed against women. The Liberals should be ashamed, especially as they claim to champion the support of women. Violent firearms offences are up by 116%, and gun regulations do not stop criminals from acquiring firearms. They only hurt law-abiding citizens.

Since 2015, extortion is up 357%, auto theft is up 45% and human trafficking is up 84%. The bottom line is that if the Liberals cared about strengthening our borders, they would jail the traffickers, and there would be an immediate drop in crimes with illegal weapons, such as extortion and armed robbery. Bill C-2, if passed in its current form, will allow gangsters and traffickers to continue to cause chaos and tragedy in my riding.

This bill would also give the government warrantless power over Canadians' mail. The Liberals seem perfectly fine with intercepting private letters and packages of law-abiding Canadians. This is not public safety; this is government overreach.

Bill C-2 then targets the use of cash, our legal tender, based on hypothetical crimes, while the Liberals stay soft on the real ones. Extortion, auto theft and human trafficking are the real crimes surging, and the government is more interested in regulating what is in our wallets and in our mail. Drug dealers would not be stopped by this bill. They would simply move their operations to different forms and different systems. Money launderers would not be stopped either. They would find new ways to move their cash. The only people who would get squeezed are honest Canadians who pay their bills and send packages.

Canadians want real change and criminals behind bars, not more government control over their mail and money. Under this legislation, the government reserves the right to force the hand of Canadians and Internet companies to surrender sensitive data without a warrant. Police cannot search our homes without warrants or probable cause, so why should they be allowed to search our private communications without warrants? That is not just an attack on privacy. It goes against free speech and expression, both of which are protected by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

To conclude my speech, I want to end on the note that I completely agree with the Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government, who once sat in opposition and said, “Could the minister assure those who are listening to the debate that the government does not, in any fashion whatsoever, allow for any sort of invasion of privacy without some form of a judicial court warrant to enable police to do so?” The Liberals once understood this policy, and today they are shredding it. Canadians want criminals behind bars, not their freedom bargained away. Bill C-2 would bulldoze liberties while letting criminals off the hook, and that is why the Conservatives will not stand for it.

Sukhman Gill

Transcript

Government Orders

Discussions (0)