Ned Kuruc
Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, Ontario · Conservative · Canada
“Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for sharing her time. Before I get into Bill C-16 , I would like to acknowledge that last weekend the great people of Hamilton East—Stoney Creek commemorated the 213th anniversary of the Battle of Stoney Creek, one of the most important victories in Canadian history.”
“(1820) Chief of Police Bill Fordy, of the Niagara Regional Police Service, said: Community safety is strengthened when we continue to have thoughtful conversations about how our justice system responds to serious and repeat offenders.”
“In addition to reversing the Liberals' weak policies, Bill C-232 would restore a more balanced and common-sense approach to corrections by bringing back the principle of “only the necessary restrictions” that was established by the previous Conservative government through the Safe Streets and Communities Act of 2012.”
“They are reminded that their loved ones will never come home, while the person responsible continues to receive privileges and consideration from the very system that failed them. This is not justice.”
“It is no surprise that under the Liberal government, crime is increasing at alarming rates. Now the Liberals are making the same mistake again. Canadians want to feel safe. Criminals are becoming more aggressive. They are targeting businesses and using intimidation and violence.”
“They felt betrayed by a system that seemed to place the interests of dangerous offenders ahead of the rights, concerns and dignity of the victims and their families. The legislation is about accountability, transparency and ensuring that victims are never treated as an afterthought.”
The complete record
Every one of 188 lines we hold for Ned Kuruc, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 4.
“Mr. Speaker, the member mentioned the CBC. We know that money is going towards Eurovision, yet you are taking a scalpel to veterans and veterans affairs. What is more important: supporting our veterans or bringing Eurovision to Canada?”
“Mr. Speaker, what the member just said was misleading. The fact is, we have put motions and bills forward, which have all been rejected by that side of the House, to help Canadians. As far as the Prime Minister flying around goes, all I can see is that he is collecting Air Miles or Aeroplan points. We have no results from all this travel. It is time he comes back to the House and gives results to Canadians.”
“Mr. Speaker, we have seen time and time again that the government does not listen to experts and does not listen to Canadians. The fact of the matter is that every time we debate during question period, the Liberals snicker and laugh on the other side when we bring up real testimony from Canadians and expert witnesses. I think the Prime Minister thinks he is smarter than everybody and smarter than Canadians. We see him time and time again talking down to members in the House and Canadians. Is anyone on that side, even in the front bench, actually listening to Canadians?”
“Mr. Speaker, the government has driven a lot of jobs out of this country, including the ones the member mentioned. I believe the government is not focused on results. It is focused on headlines and focused on selling Canadians big promises. I have said this since the day I got here six months ago. The Liberal government has been focused on winning, not governing the country. We are all waiting for a government that delivers results, not just headlines, and that does not mislead Canadians to push us into the next election to try to hold power.”
“Mr. Speaker, YMCA spending is about $25 million. The budget is $78.3 billion. This is just a small piece. We have to focus on the big picture. At the end of the day, printing more money is not a fiscally good idea. One has to ask oneself this: Is the current Prime Minister working for Canadians, the bank or Brookfield?”
“The choice before the House is simple: a government that treats the national credit card like an unlimited resource or a government that recognizes its responsibility to future generations. The budget fails on fiscal responsibility. It fails on the next generation. It fails on accountability and results. The Parliamentary Budget Officer has raised the alarm. Young Canadians are already paying the price, but the Prime Minister wants to make the bill bigger. The government's answer is to simply spend more. Conservatives reject that approach. We believe in restoring fiscal anchors; we believe in protecting the next generation, not mortgaging them, and we believe in a government that delivers real results and not bigger bureaucracy.”
“The government creates a new agency to solve a problem, and the agency demands more staff, more funding and more time. Years later, the problem is still there, but the bureaucracy is bigger and more bloated. Canadians deserve a government that focuses on results. We have heard from the Liberals that global conditions require higher deficits, that investment demands patience and that one more agency is the solution to the problem, but Conservatives believe in something better. We believe in spending discipline, not deficit addiction; we believe in empowering our youth and setting them up to become the future of this great country, and we believe that government should measure success by outcomes and not by how much tax money it burns through.”
“In all these reports, we see spending shooting way over the budgets that have been set out. We see no system of accountability, no progress tracking and no real consequences for poor management. The government promises results but delivers bloated bureaucracy. The budget promises to bring federal spending down, but the costly budget will keep federal program spending at 15.3% of GDP. This is still higher than prepandemic levels. The government spends 55% of its operating budget on staffing and twice as much on outside consultants. The PBO has already pointed out that a lot of what the Liberals call capital investments is actually reoccurring program spending, or ongoing operating costs disguised as long-term investment. This is not transparency; it is not accountability, and it is certainly not value for money. We have seen this before.”
“We can take Build Canada Homes as an example. It was created to work with other sectors and departments to make housing more available and affordable. There is one problem, which is that this already exists. We already have the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, which has programs to finance affordable housing and was already tasked with overseeing the national housing strategy. Instead of fixing its failures, the government simply creates new agencies to hide old problems. It is duplication dressed up as innovation. At the public accounts committee, which I sit on, we have received report after report from the Auditor General that have all been damning. The common thread in all of them is that we have too much bureaucracy and government overspending and not enough accountability.”
“Today's youth are already facing a housing crisis, an impossible-to-enter job market and high living costs. Now the Liberals are saying not to worry; on top of all that, they get to pay for the Liberals' overspending for decades to come. Conservatives refuse to accept that. We believe the government should leave the next generation stronger, not burdened under a weight they did not choose. Third, the budget explodes bureaucracy instead of producing results. The cost of the federal bureaucracy has increased by 80% since 2015, growing by $6 billion just last year. Canadians are not asking for more agencies or more layers of red tape; they are asking for results that actually make their lives better. What does budget 2025 deliver to solve the issues concerning Canadians? It doubles bureaucracies to do the jobs of already existing agencies.”
“Young people between the ages of 15 and 24, who are just graduating, are facing the highest unemployment rate the country has seen in decades. According to an article, an economic policy professor from the University of Toronto said that we are “teetering on the edge of a recession”, which will “have a disproportionate impact on young people.” The youth are usually the first and hardest hit when economic conditions are weak. Beyond the job market, young Canadians are trying to enter a housing market that is completely out of reach. (1020) Youth are watching their friends move back home, delaying starting families or leaving the country altogether to search for opportunity. They are not choosing these things but being pushed into them by government policies that have made life unaffordable.”
“Debt does matter, and ignoring the warnings of the Parliamentary Budget Officer is not leadership; it is irresponsible and dangerous. Second, the budget sacrifices and mortgages young Canadians. Every dollar borrowed today must be repaid with interest by the generations that follow us, yet the government continues to destroy young people with higher future taxes, higher interest costs and fewer dollars available for things they actually rely on. When he tabled the budget, the Minister of Finance said, “To the youth, this budget was made for you”. How exactly does forcing young people to pay for government deficits and soaring debt help them? The budget does nothing for the youth today, but they will be forced to pay off all the government's overspending tomorrow.”
“According to the Parliamentary Budget Officer, by trying to separate operational spending from capital investments, the Liberals have expanded the definition so far that they have included about 94 billion dollars' worth of spending that does not actually count as investment. This means that the generational investments that Liberals have been sloganizing are actually 30% lower than advertised. Worse yet, according to the PBO's definition, the day-to-day operating balance after their new budget would still be in a deficit position. The Liberals continue to act as though they can bend economic reality to their will, as though deficits do not matter, as though inflation cannot rise and as though the PBO is not highlighting their economic sleight of hand. Well, deficits do matter.”
“The Parliamentary Budget Officer, the independent fiscal watchdog, has made it extremely clear: The budget's deficits will average $65 billion over the next four years, up dramatically from last year. The federal debt-to-GDP ratio is no longer on a declining track despite the government's repeated promises. As well, interest payments, money that delivers zero services to Canadians, are projected to rise to over 11% of revenues by the end of the decade. The Prime Minister is supposed to be a great economist, but this is not fiscal management; this is a fiscal failure. What is the Liberal government's response? It is to have more spending and more borrowing. The worst part is the clever accounting tricks Liberals have played to distract Canadians from their disastrous spending.”
“Canadians watching this at home deserve clarity, so I will focus on three failures of the Liberal budget. First, the government plans to have endless deficits while printing money to bring back economic investment and growth for Canadians despite the Parliamentary Budget Officer's warning of even higher deficits ahead. Second, the budget mortgages the future of our youth, forcing them to pay tomorrow for today's mistakes. Finally, there is an explosion of bureaucracy and new agencies that spend even more taxpayer money without delivering results. First, I will start with how printing money and running massive deficits is not an economic plan. For 10 years now, Liberals have insisted that deficits pay for themselves. The facts are clear: That has not worked.”
“Mr. Speaker, I rise today to address the government's budget 2025 and its implementation plan, Bill C-15 . We have heard this story before about generational investments, Liberal investments, leading to growth. We have heard this story because Justin Trudeau made the same promises 10 years ago. Budget 2025 is just more missed priorities, dangerous gambles and a complete disregard for the long-term finances of Canada. For an entire decade, Canadians have been told to just wait, to wait for results and affordability. Instead of results, they have watched their paycheques shrink, their mortgages rise and their cost of living explode, all while the government continues to pat itself on the back for programs that have not delivered for Canadians.”
“Mr. Speaker, today I rise on behalf of 23,576 Canadians to present e-petition 6790. Canadians have spoken, loud and clear, and have displayed their opposition to the Liberals' EV mandate, which is economically harmful and risks job losses and delayed investment in Canada's auto sector, which is already dealing with the crippling effects of tariffs coming from south of the border. This petition calls on the government to repeal the federal EV mandate, ensure consumer choice, rather than government-imposed quotas, and adopt policies that improve EV affordability.”
“Mr. Speaker, the government is the most expensive in Canadian history. Every dollar the Prime Minister spends comes out of the pockets of Canadians. The more the government spends, the more things like housing cost. The Ontario Home Builders' Association says it is deeply disappointed with the Liberal budget, which fails to unlock supply and restore affordability. The government's inaction on housing has put 40,000 jobs at risk in Ontario, and the impact of these losses on the Ontario economy could be $5.3 billion. How can the Liberal budget cost so much but deliver so little to Canadians?”
“The Prime Minister 's new budget wants to build Canada strong, but I think we can all agree that Canada would be much stronger if Brookfield paid its taxes right here at home.”
“Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister 's company, Brookfield, has been exposed as Canada's biggest tax-dodger. Brookfield managed to avoid paying a staggering $6.5 billion in Canadian taxes. As chair of Brookfield, the Prime Minister registered three multi-billion dollar investment funds in the Cayman Islands and above a bike shop in Bermuda, all to avoid paying Canadian taxes. On one hand, in his new budget, he is asking hard-working Canadians to fund a $78.3-billion deficit. On the other hand, he has saved his elitist friends from paying $6.5 billion in taxes. It is no wonder that the Prime Minister got all the Liberals to vote against having Brookfield come to Ottawa to answer to Canadians.”
“Mr. Speaker, our justice system hit absolute rock bottom this past Friday when the Supreme Court ruled that there would be no mandatory minimums for monsters who access and possess child sexual abuse content. This comes after 10 years of soft-on-crime Liberal policies. Let me be clear. We are talking about two monsters who were in possession of hundreds of images and videos that were made by torturing innocent children. Conservatives immediately announced that we would use the notwithstanding clause to overturn this very dangerous ruling. Monsters who possess child sexual abuse content are not victims. They are criminals. We should lock them up and throw away the key. As a father and a parent, I find this disgusting. The innocence of our children should be protected at all costs. If we cannot protect our children, who are we?”
“Madam Speaker, yes, I have attended a lot of town halls, and I will be having my own shortly. People have had enough. We have heard some very sad stories. We have heard stories of things that could have been prevented. We have heard of lives lost. We are hearing that Canadians are completely fed up. Record numbers of people are coming out to town halls, which, I would like to point out, are not partisan events. People are coming looking for answers. They are asking us why these things are happening to them, to someone they know or to their child. We keep pointing back to Bill C-75 and to the failed Liberal justice system. After 10 years, I find it heard to believe that members on the other side are absolutely not listening to Canadians when they are speaking, loud and clear, to every member of the House.”
“Madam Speaker, yes, the bill proposes some things, but not enough. We are here debating it because Liberal bail reform, in the form of Bill C-75 , which the Liberals introduced many years ago, has completely failed. In my opinion, the bill before us does not even go halfway. Bill C-75 should be repealed completely.”
“Madam Speaker, the past week has been very difficult for me, as a father. We heard something that, yes, is a Supreme Court ruling, but after 10 years of weak Liberal policy, this is what we have come to. This is a low point in the Canadian judicial system. Will the Liberals be using the notwithstanding clause? Will the Prime Minister simply even comment on what happened on Friday? That is what I and every Canadian, especially the parents out there, would like to know.”
“Conservatives would make sure the bill before us would actually scrap the weak Liberal policies in favour of public and community safety. Our country hit absolute rock bottom this weekend when the Supreme Court ruled there will be no mandatory minimum sentences for criminals who access or possess child sexual abuse content, in other words, content that includes children being raped. Yes, I was heard clearly: The new Supreme Court ruling, after 10 years of the Liberal government, has removed mandatory minimum sentences for criminals who access or possess child sexual abuse content. The Liberals have been creating the kind of culture in Canada for the past decade where even a mandatory minimum jail sentence for accessing or possessing child sexual abuse content is viewed as unconstitutional.”
“We cannot prioritize the victim and the offender at the same time. For too long, the government has been prioritizing the criminal, and our public safety has declined as a result. Our cities have been taken over by violent repeat criminals, released time and time again. The Liberals are admitting their prior policies have failed Canadians when it comes to safety, because they acknowledge a 41% rise in the violent crime severity index since 2014 and increases in homicide, sexual assault and extortion offences. Bill C-14 attempts to fix the consequences of the Liberals' past Bill C-75 and Bill C-5 , which weakened the bill system, but they are keeping the same language framework, the same language that puts priority on releasing the criminal.”
“It would create a major offences category that would trigger a detention-first posture for the following charges: firearms offences, sexual offences, kidnapping, human trafficking, home invasion, breaking and entering into dwellings, robbery, extortion, arson and assault. This sounds very good to me. The jail not bail act would make it mandatory for judges to consider the full criminal history of the accused and would introduce the 10-year look-back rule, meaning that if someone has been convicted of a major offence in the last 10 years and is charged with another major offence while on bail, they would be barred from receiving bail again. These all sound like common-sense policies, but under the Liberal government, common sense has disappeared and been replaced with weak policies that allow bail for violent criminals.”
“The Liberals are starting to see what their destructive policies have done to our communities, which is why they have started taking Conservative suggestions on bail reform, but their proposed solution, Bill C-14 , would not patch up all the holes they have made. The Conservatives have listened to Canadians and have already come forward with a plan that would completely patch up the holes the Liberals have made in our bail system. Our jail not bail act covers everything I have just talked about. It would put victims first and focus on public safety instead of on how short we can make a criminal's sentence.”
“We want to restore CSO ineligibility, in order to exclude robbery, firearms offences, trafficking and chronic violent offenders. Conditional sentence orders allow an offender to serve their sentence in the community under strict conditions like house arrest or curfew. There is no reason someone who commits human trafficking should be able to serve their time in the comfort of their own home and in our neighbourhoods. It makes absolutely zero sense. Conservatives already proposed extending reverse onus on major crimes and making any attack on first responders a major offence, in the jail not bail act of one of my colleagues, which the Liberals voted against.”
“However, after 10 years of Liberal government, they do not feel safe in their own neighbourhoods, and rightfully so when we have criminals like those I just described being released back on our streets within hours. (1240) For 10 years, the Conservatives have been advocating for, and presenting, solutions to the weak bail system. At every turn, the Liberals have voted against us. Our plan to restore safe streets is common sense. We want to repeal the principle of restraint and replace it with a public safety primacy clause. This would put the public and community safety as the governing principle, putting Canadians, not criminals, first. We also want to restore mandatory minimum sentences for firearms crimes, sexual assaults, kidnapping, human trafficking and other serious violent crime. It sounds very reasonable to me.”
“Earlier this year, Hamilton police had to release a statement after a man convicted of several sexual assaults was released on bail. In 2022, this man dragged a woman into the woods, gagged her, tied her hands behind her back and proceeded to assault her. In 2023, he entered the home of a 74-year-old woman and assaulted her for over an hour. In February of this year, he was released on bail pending his trial. Hamilton police released a statement with his picture to warn people because they believed he remained a threat to the community, obviously. Bill C-14 gives us half measures instead of complete solutions. I heard from Canadians over the course of the election that they want to be safe at home and out on the streets.”
“This creates accountability and puts fear into criminals. Instead, criminals are not deterred by weak Liberal policies. Just to name a few, Bill C-5 repealed the following mandatory minimums. Discharging a firearm with intent had a mandatory minimum of four years. Discharging a firearm with recklessness had four years. Robbery with a firearm had four years. Extortion with a firearm had four years. Why should those have been repealed? It makes absolutely no sense. Here are some examples of how weak Liberal bail policies impact our communities. In the House, we heard about Bailey McCourt, a young mother of two daughters who was killed by her ex-husband just hours after he was released on bail. Recently, another young mother of four, Savannah Kulla, was killed by her former partner in Brampton while he was out on bail.”
“What Canadians need are safe streets they can walk down and safe homes they can sleep in. The only way we can restore that is by completely removing this weak Liberal bail policy. Bill C-75 was the Liberals' attempt at bail reform, and we can now agree that it completely failed. We should be scrapping the principle of restraint entirely and replacing it with a clause that prioritizes public safety or just gets rid of it completely. Bill C-14 also stops halfway to solving the issue of mandatory minimums. It would include consecutive sentences and aggravating factors, but it leaves those up to judicial discretion. Most importantly, it would not reinstate mandatory minimums. Criminals charged with firearm, sexual and repeat violent offences should be afraid of committing crimes because they would receive a mandatory minimum sentence.”
“When the Liberals introduced Bill C-75 , it weakened our courts' ability to keep violent repeat offenders behind bars because it directed them to release the accused persons at the earliest reasonable opportunity and under the least onerous conditions. Bill C-14 stops short of repealing this. Although it confirms that restraint does not require release, it still leaves the door open to allow violent criminals to get bail. Bill C-75 , which introduced the principle of restraint, was the Liberals' attempt at bail reform. The fact that we are standing here talking about it means that it failed. Bill C-14 is only going halfway to removing it. The bill would still direct our courts to release criminals under the least onerous conditions necessary when they do order bail.”
“Madam Speaker, it is very clear that the Liberals have lost control of crime. Let us look at their track record. Since 2015, violent crime is up 55%. Firearms crime is up 130%. Extortion skyrocketed and is up 330%. Sexual assaults are up 76% and homicides are up 29%. They have introduced Bill C-14 . It takes in some of the Conservatives' suggestions, but I feel that the bill still falls short in some areas. It does not remove the principle of restraint, which prioritizes criminals over victims. It does not restore mandatory minimum sentences, which were repealed by Bill C-5 . Conditional sentence order limits do not go far enough. For example, robbery, gun and trafficking offences can still access house arrest. Let us start with the principle of restraint.”
“Mr. Speaker, over the past weekend at Halloween events in Stoney Creek, the crippling cost of living was the hot topic at my booth. New inflation data confirms that all three core inflationary measures are above target. Grocery inflation is up 4%, and rent inflation is up nearly 5% in the last year. Liberal deficits are driving inflation. The more Liberals spend, the more it costs Canadians at the grocery store. Will the Liberals get their inflationary deficits under control to make life more affordable for Canadians?”
“Mr. Speaker, we have heard a lot from the Liberal speakers today. A simple question is whether they are talking to Canadians in their ridings or are they stuck in this echo chamber where they believe that by talking to themselves, they will find the answers. I was in the member's riding yesterday and over 1,000 people from Brampton came out to the crime town hall, and they have had enough. They lined up out the door to give their testimonies and complaints. They are sick of extortion, guns, crime, drugs and fentanyl, as the member mentioned. All the Liberals have given us lip service. Is the member actually speaking to people in her city?”
“Mr. Speaker, I would like to table e-petition 6579. It is a non-partisan petition. This petition is in regard to the longest ballot, which I strongly feel disrupts the democratic process. It disrupts the election process for some Canadians, like seniors, the elderly and people who speak English as a second language. It confuses the process. We have to make a streamlined process that allows all Canadians to find the simplest path forward to vote for whoever they want to vote for. The longest ballot weaponizes democracy. I present this petition to clean that up because I think people on both sides of the aisle have had enough.”
“Today, we will vote on a Conservative motion to lower food inflation. Will the Liberals do the right thing and vote with us and Canadians ?”
“Mr. Speaker, I would say to the Hamilton steelworker and the workers of Arvin Avenue, who lose sleep over job security, and to the recently unemployed, that they have done everything right. The Prime Minister cannot make a deal and has failed them. I would say to the many who visit food banks in Hamilton that they have done everything right. The Liberal inflation food tax has failed them. I would say to the many who do not feel safe walking down the street in their own neighbourhoods that they have done everything right. The Liberals' soft-on-crime policy has failed them. The Liberals had the chance last week to vote for a Conservative motion that would put violent repeat offenders behind bars. They voted against it. Soon we will have a vote on the Conservative jail not bail act. I hope the Liberals will join us in that vote.”
“Mr. Speaker, every dollar the Liberal Prime Minister spends comes out of the pockets of hard-working Canadians. Never has the government spent so much to achieve so little. The Liberals lit a pile of money on fire to give us record food bank usages and grocery store prices that are 40% higher than before. The budget watchdog says the Liberal deficits will now be twice the size of Justin Trudeau's. Will the Liberals change course and vote for our Conservative motion to stop the Liberal taxes on food?”
“Mr. Speaker, there is breaking news in a bombshell report from Canada's independent fiscal watchdog: the Liberal government deficits are exploding. This means an even bigger pile of debt for Canadians and also means higher prices on everything. Grocery prices are already up 70% over target, but the Liberal plan is just to add more fuel to the fire. Our debt is exploding, our economy is shrinking, and the government's cupboards are bare. Why is the Prime Minister going ahead with his crazy budget to double the deficit and send even more Canadians to food banks?”
“Mr. Speaker, Nicole from the Stoney Creek Community Food Bank informed my office that one in four households need to visit a food bank, and one in three individuals walking in are children. It was serving 30 to 40 families per day before the summer and now 55 to 65 per day, which is up 71% since spring. This is “Christmas season demand without Christmas level donations.” Canadians were promised that food prices would decrease, but they have gone up. Would the Prime Minister please explain to the good people of Stoney Creek why this promise was broken?”
“Mr. Speaker, food inflation is up 70% since the Liberals took office. Groceries are up 3.5%, which is 70% above the inflation target. Beef is up 33%, canned soup is up 26%, and grapes are up 24%. The Prime Minister said Canadians would judge him by the cost at the grocery stores. The new report from Food Banks Canada gives Canada a failing grade on food insecurity. He has failed. Does the self-proclaimed great economist Prime Minister think that long lines at the food banks are good for our economy?”
“Mr. Speaker, I would like to repeat part of my speech: Bill C-75 requires judges to prioritize releasing an accused person at the earliest opportunity and on the least onerous conditions. Clearly, after 10 years, the Liberals must realize that bail reform is needed. They must be listening to their constituents. That is why I bring this up, so it can be added to Bill C-2 , because we have been talking about it for years. It needs to be repealed for the safety of everyone and all Canadians. Again, in good faith and working together on what is best for Canada, I hope that the Liberals—”
“Mr. Speaker, yes, it is a thick bill, and it will be moved along. As I have said, we do agree with some parts of the bill. Specifically, we have some issues with part 6 and part 9 that will hopefully be hashed out in committee, but again, I want to revert back to fentanyl, bail reform and gun crime. These are specific to me and my riding of Hamilton, and I would love to see these incorporated into Bill C-2 in some way as we move along. As some colleagues on the other side said, we need to work together, so hopefully they will take my words in good faith and co-operation and input them as this bill moves along.”
“Mr. Speaker, I know my colleague's heart is in the right place concerning the words I just spoke. I have also talked to the chief of police and other police officers, and they are calling for bail reform. Specifically to Bill C-2 , I am here to touch on things that I believe should be included. Through my discussions with Hamilton police, I know they believe that the bail system is broken. In the spirit of collaboration, we do agree on part 1, part 2 and part 3, and hopefully as this moves along, we can collaborate on other parts. I hope that the Liberals can see my concerns and consider them in the spirit of good faith.”
“Crime is on the rise, but despite the facts and figures, the Liberal government has repealed and softened its sentencing and bail measures. It is appalling and completely unacceptable and it must change. The most disturbing statistic to me is that total sexual violations against children are up 120%. A 25-year-old man from Welland, not far from my riding and in my colleague's riding, got an early release from jail in March after serving time for sexually assaulting a 12-year-old boy. Five months later, he forcibly entered a home and sexually assaulted a three-year-old girl. As a father of young children, I am haunted by these stories and these statistics. I can only hope that the Liberals understand that we must protect the innocence of children at all costs.”
“The Hamilton Police Service had to release a statement of warning to the public after a 22-year-old repeat violent sexual offender was released on bail. This individual forcibly entered the home of a 72-year-old Hamilton woman and sexually assaulted her for one hour. Through DNA findings, he was later connected to a 2022 and 2023 sexual assault claim. Why was he let out on bail? Bailey McCourt, a young mother we heard about earlier today, was murdered by her ex-husband just hours after he was released on bail for assault. My constituents and I lose sleep at night thinking about how insanely off path this country has gone in terms of protecting its citizens. The statistics are right in front of the government's face.”
“The third issue that Bill C-2 does not address is bail reform. In 2019, the Liberals introduced Bill C-75 , which requires judges to prioritize releasing an accused person at the earliest opportunity and on the least onerous conditions. Why are we not prioritizing the victim or the safety of law-abiding citizens? A Hamilton individual was released on bail after a string of armed robberies this spring. He has now fled his residence, and the police have completely lost his whereabouts. Conservatives are calling for jail, not bail. The Liberals' soft-on-crime policies have put Canadians in danger. For example, total violent crime is up 50%, total homicides are up 28%, auto theft is up 45%, human trafficking is up 83% and total sexual assaults are up almost 75%.”