Kelly DeRidder
Kitchener Centre, Ontario · Conservative · Canada
“Mr. Speaker, when I debated on Bill C‑16 , the protecting victims act, I spoke clearly to my community to say that I am not voting wholeheartedly against this piece of legislation. I am not voting against protecting victims.”
“Mr. Speaker, while I agree that there is a time and place where time allocation makes sense, this is not one of those times. This is an important piece of legislation that does not have unanimous consent in the House and therefore needs debate.”
“Mr. Speaker, that was another non-answer. The Liberal government has said that it is going to make life affordable for everyday Canadians. If this is true, can the minister please stand up and explain why seniors make up the fastest-growing group in the Waterloo region facing homelessness?”
“If interventions can come earlier, lives may be protected and future violence may be prevented. Another story from my riding is of a woman who was strangled by her husband in front of their daughter.”
“Our justice system depends on trust. People need to believe that the rules are applied fairly, that serious crimes are treated seriously and that victims matter, full stop. That is especially important when we are talking about crimes that leave lasting scars on victims, families and entire communities.”
“Canadians are increasingly concerned about public safety. Repeat offenders cycle through the system, and victims struggle to get justice, so why would we yet again weaken the consequences for offenders, while victims try to rebuild their life? Let us think about that.”
The complete record
Every one of 248 lines we hold for Kelly DeRidder, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 4 of 5.
“Mr. Speaker, my colleague is right that this is a nationwide crisis. This is not just on my doorstep; it is on the doorstep of every single of us sitting in this House. When I was speaking with people when I was door knocking in my community, I do not think there was one family I talked to that was not affected, either directly or indirectly, by the drug crisis. That is just in my community. I know that every single one of the seats in this House represents communities that are the same. We need to start doing something about this.”
“Mr. Speaker, as a proud Conservative standing in this House, I will reflect on what we will do about this drug crisis. A billion dollars has already been spent by the government, only to perpetuate the problem. As a Conservative, I stand here today to say we will focus on recovery, we will focus on rehabilitation and we will take the lead and do what is right for Canadians in this country.”
“We owe our first responders more than burnout and despair. We owe the 53,000 already lost more than just a budget announcing that it is going to end. Every Canadian life is worth fighting for, and it is time to bring Canadians home drug-free.”
“They are Canadians in pain, deserving of compassion, treatment and a real chance at recovery. However, the families in Kitchener, families watching their community deteriorate, are feeling unheard and abandoned. The government set fire to the barn, and now it is walking away hoping for someone else to put out the flames. Well, I am proud to stand here and say that Conservatives will step up and put out the flames. I am here to tell Canadians that they do not have to suffer and that there is hope in abstinence-based rehabilitation. The Conservative plan offers a clear path out of this: end the failed experiment of safe supply and take the billions we are spending to perpetuate misery and invest it into 50,000 real treatment beds, medical detox and recovery housing. We owe our youth more than safe supply and body bags.”
“They once witnessed a woman shooting up right in front of the window of the Pluto Day Care in broad daylight while children played inside. Another constituent wrote that after a recent decision allowing the Victoria Street and Weber Street encampment to remain, they have lost all hope in the downtown core. They wonder why they must follow every bylaw, shovel their walkway and keep their property safe and clean while others' rights extend beyond theirs. What about the rest of Kitchener citizens? They ended with some sentences that no Canadian should ever have to say. They said this has become their new normal. They said this is downtown and they want to feel safe again. They do not know why their family does not matter anymore. Let me be clear. This is not the fault of people struggling with addictions and mental illness.”
“They are asking for mental health supports, treatment options and real solutions, not half measures and not abandonment, yet addictions and mental health are mentioned exactly once in this budget, and that is to say the funding is ending. I have had numerous constituents write to me echoing the same thing: not feeling safe downtown and feeling disappointed that this is what has become of their once vibrant and safe community. One wrote to me recently describing what their family faces every day living near Weber Street. They said that every single day, they see something that they are amazed is even allowed in their community. They said just up the road is a hotel filled with homeless individuals, including children, living in conditions where drugs are openly used.”
“These are all national examples of how out of hand this drug crisis has gotten, but unfortunately, my community of Kitchener has not dodged it. This crisis is not abstract to the people of Kitchener. It is lived daily. Our downtown core, once vibrant, busy and safe, is struggling. Small businesses are reporting lower foot traffic, rising theft, property damage and incidents that make customers and staff feel unsafe. Restaurants, cafés and shops told me directly that patronage is down because people no longer feel comfortable bringing their families downtown. These small businesses are not just storefronts; they are jobs, community anchors and part of what makes our cities home. They are asking for leadership from the federal government.”
“This country has now lost more people to the drug crisis than we lost in the entirety of the Second World War. Let that sink in. Let us think about this. A global conflict that spanned continents and years took fewer Canadian lives than drugs, untreated addiction and government failure, and despite the staggering loss and the fact that we are losing more Canadians to addiction than one of the deadliest conflicts in our history, the government has chosen to put zero new funding, zero new programs and zero new hope in this budget for mental health and addictions. Communities are grieving at a wartime scale. Families are burying loved ones at a larger-than-wartime scale, and the federal government is responding with silence. Addictions and mental health are mentioned exactly once in this budget, and that is to say the funding is ending.”
“Given this information, the common-sense solution would be to crack down on illicit drug networks and use taxpayer dollars to help fund abstinence-based recovery treatment. We are witnessing rising drug use, rising overdose risk and growing addiction among youth, many of whom started using as children, yet we still lack the infrastructure, resources and political will to properly treat them. Addictions and mental health are mentioned exactly once in this budget, only to say the funding is ending. (1625) The scale of loss in Canada's drug crisis defies comprehension. According to the federal government's own data, 53,821 Canadians have died from an overdose since 2016. To put that into perspective, Canada lost approximately 45,000 soldiers in World War II.”
“Essentially, we are sending paramedics and firefighters to fight a crisis that requires structural solutions while giving them nothing but repetition, burnout and trauma. Addictions and mental health are mentioned exactly once in this budget, only to say the funding is ending. Another vulnerable group being affected by this crisis is our youth. They are now suffering deeply from this drug crisis. The data shows the trend is worsening. Even the CBC has recently reported that doctors in London, Ontario, are seeing alarming numbers of youth, some as young as early teens, using opioids and other substances. Another CityNews report highlights that non-medical prescription opioid use among students jumped 10% in two years. Given all that, does it make sense for the solution to be funding opioids with taxpayer dollars?”
“Meanwhile, an article from Canadian Affairs showcases what paramedics, firefighters and other frontline workers, like our nurses, are describing as their mental health and moral injury trauma, not from overdoses but from the endless cycle of drug-related emergencies they are powerless to resolve. One paramedic candidly described attending calls day after day for the same individuals, often without any resources to offer any long-term help. These are not merely medical emergencies; these are social emergencies rooted in addiction, homelessness and untreated mental illness, yet first responders regularly arrive at scenes where there is nowhere safe to send people, no capacity for long-term treatment and no effective wraparound supports. There is no durable strategy from the federal government to address the root causes.”
“They should have had that same mindset before starting the safe supply experiment. They are pretending their decisions had nothing to do with the crisis Canadians are facing today. The government set fire to the barn, and now it is walking away hoping for someone else to put out the flames. The human toll of this drug crisis is being borne in large part by those we ask to save lives: our first responders. Recent reporting from CityNews shows the scale of what they are facing. The Vancouver Fire Rescue Services recently answered 54 overdose incidents in one day, the highest number of overdose responses ever recorded by that department. These are not rare, isolated events. In 2024, the average was between 20 and 25 daily overdose calls. In the Waterloo region, we just had to put out an overdose safety awareness alert this week.”
“Mr. Speaker, it was more than five years ago that the federal government launched its so-called safe supply. It was more than five years ago that it decided the answer to this growing drug crisis was to use federal taxpayer dollars to expand access to hard drugs, not treatment, not recovery and not healing, just drugs. After a half a decade of chaos and heartbreak and $1 billion spent, what did the Liberals decide to do? In this budget, they chose to walk away. They chose to let mental health and addiction support funding expire, with no plan to renew it, no plan to replace it and no plan to help Canadians who are living through the consequences of the policies the Liberals championed. They are passing the responsibility to the provinces and municipalities, claiming it is not their jurisdiction.”
“Mr. Speaker, in Kitchener, families are making heartbreaking sacrifices just to get by. Alex, a father, told me he eats barely half a meal a day so his children can have three meals a day. Kirby, who has to worry about not only his children but also his grandfather, shared with me that when he feeds them, he waits until they are finished, and if there is none left he will just have to wait until tomorrow. This is not okay, yet the budget offers nothing to ease their burden. Instead it piles on unprecedented debt that will drive inflation higher and push grocery prices further out of reach for Canadians. Canadians do not need empty promises; they need affordability, dignity and hope. We cannot accept a budget that ignores the reality that Canadians and our children are going hungry. They deserve better.”
“Mr. Speaker, my colleague mentioned the SR&ED tax credit and that it is to support innovation in Canada, which I agree with. It is intended to support Canadian companies with research and innovation in Canada. Can the member explain why Huawei, a non-Canadian, Chinese company, got $100 million back in this credit?”
“Mr. Speaker, yes, there was crime before the government came in, but since then, violent crime is up 55%, gun crime is up 130%, extortion is up 330%, sexual assault is up 76% and homicide is up 29%. We need to keep these criminals in jail.”
“Mr. Speaker, first off, these things are absolutely devastating. Our children are our next generation and our children are not safe. I have no words to say other than that these offenders should not be on our streets. They should not be victimizing our children. Our children are our legacy. We need to, as a country, keep them safe.”
“Mr. Speaker, it really unfortunate for the member opposite to say that these are exaggerated things happening in this country. These are real things. These are real lives being lost. These are the real consequences of what the Liberals have done to our justice system. We are not trying to block anything. We are trying to show Canadians how we are working to protect them and make sure these criminals go to jail.”
“Mr. Speaker, we are continually being told that we are attacking, that we are not being non-partisan with these issues and that we are not working with the government to pass bills on these issues, but the truth is that it is the other way around. We believe in democracy, and we believe the public needs to know what is in this legislation and what the Conservatives are doing to protect them and to make sure these criminals end up in jail.”
“This is what victims' families are pleading for. This is what Savannah Kulla and Bailey McCourt deserved but never got. We will move amendments to make Bill C-14 live up to its promises. We will fight to turn Liberal redundancy into Conservative reality. However, if the government refuses, if it clings to its failed ideology, then Bill C-14 will fail the only test that matters: keeping Canadians safe tonight, tomorrow night and every night after. Canadians have had enough of Liberal clarifications and half measures. They want Conservative convictions. It is past time to jail, not give bail, and keep our streets safe.”
“We should restore mandatory minimums for those exact crimes, the ones the Liberals repealed with Bill C-5 . We should end house arrest for robbery, firearms offences, trafficking and chronic violent offenders, with no more living room sentences. We should mandate judges to consider the full criminal record, every conviction, every breach and every outstanding charge, and lower the risk threshold from “substantial likelihood” to “reasonably foreseeable”. We should bar anyone with an indictable conviction from acting as a surety, with no more criminals vouching for criminals, and require non-residents to surrender their passports. We should also fund courts, hire judges and clear backlogs so officers' work is not wasted and victims see justice. This is what police chiefs from coast to coast are begging for.”
“There would be no reverse onus, and house arrest would still be on the table if the sentence is under two years. That is playing Russian roulette with our children's lives. Bill C-14 is a half measure dressed up as a victory. Canadians deserve the full Conservative plan, the real jail not bail plan we have been fighting for since day one. Here is what real reform looks like. We should repeal the Liberal principle of restraint and replace it with a public safety clause. Public and community safety should be the governing principle in every bail decision. We should presume detention, not just reverse the onus, for every major violent offence, such as the use of firearms, sexual assault, kidnapping, human trafficking, home invasion, robbery, extortion with a firearm and arson, and for every repeat violent offender.”
“(1200) We see 50% of charges in the Waterloo region dropped because the system is clogged. Waterloo Regional Police told us personally that one in five people on Liberal release orders is caught breaching conditions. More than half of those breachers are repeat violent offenders caught multiple times on the same toothless conditions, and because of the Liberal backlog, half of the charges those officers lay never see a courtroom. In one in five breaches, half the charges are dropped. This is not justice. This is a subscription service for crime. Just last month in Richmond Hill, a 53-year-old predator allegedly groomed a child online, arranged a meeting at Lake Wilcox and sexually assaulted them. Bill C-14 would do nothing for that child.”
“Meanwhile, mass murderers like Alexandre Bissonnette would still get to stack parole eligibility because the government will not touch the Supreme Court's rulings. The bill would ban house arrest for major sexual assault under two years. That sounds tough, until we remember that the Liberals were the ones who made house arrest possible, in Bill C-5 . They fixed one hole that they punched in the boat, while robbery, firearms trafficking, kidnapping and chronic violent offenders would still get to serve their time in their living room. The bill would do nothing to restore the mandatory minimums the Liberals repealed. Sentencing would remain a judicial lottery: uneven, uncertain and unsafe. It would add no new judges, no new courtrooms and no funding to clear the backlogs.”
“That sentence is already in the Criminal Code twice, in sections 498 and 501. The bill is not reform but press release footnotes. It would expand reverse onus for some offences: violent car theft, home invasion, choking assaults and extortion. That is good, but reverse onus would still be just a procedural speed bump. The accused could still talk their way out. What Canadians need is a brick wall. They need presumptive detention for every serious violent offence and every repeat offender. The bill would add aggravating factors and a few consecutive sentences, but only in narrow combinations. Break and enter would count only if it is paired with gang-related auto theft, and only on the sentence offence. Extortion would run consecutive to arson only from the exact same event.”
“For four long years, Conservatives have stood in the House and demanded one thing: jail not bail, repealing the principle of restraint and restoring mandatory minimums and presumed detention for repeat violent offenders. All the while, the members opposite blocked us, voted against us and mocked us. Now, after heartbreaking murders, with families having paid the ultimate price, the Liberals finally copy us with Bill C-14 and call it sweeping reform. This is surgical PR, a patchwork of press releases and photo ops that nibble at the edges while the revolving door keeps spinning. Let us be crystal clear about what Bill C-14 would not do. It would not repeal the principle of restraint. It keeps the very words that created catch-and-release; it merely adds a redundant sentence saying that restraint would not require release.”
“These were two women, and there were two killers who never should have been on our streets. That is the human cost of Liberal catch-and-release. Since 2015, violent crime is up 55%, gun crime is up 130%, extortion is up 330%, sexual assault is up 76% and homicide is up 29%. This is not random; it is the direct, predictable and preventable result of the Liberals' Bill C-75 and Bill C-5 . Bill C-75 codified the toxic principle of restraint, a directive that forces police and judges to release accused persons at the earliest possible moment and under the least onerous conditions, no matter how dangerous they are. Bill C-5 gutted mandatory minimums and handed out house arrest for serious sexual assault, robbery, firearms trafficking and kidnapping.”
“Mr. Speaker, nine years of the Liberal government has turned Canada into a country where mothers kiss their children goodbye in the morning and pray they come home at night. Last month, Savannah Kulla, a 29-year-old mother of four, was shot dead in broad daylight in a Brampton strip mall. Her killer was a man who had already been charged with firearms offences and intimate partner violence, a man the Liberal justice system let walk free on bail. This summer, Bailey McCourt stood in a courtroom and begged a judge to keep her violent ex-husband behind bars. He had already choked her unconscious. The judge released him anyway on $500 bail. Hours later, James Plover hunted her down and murdered her. Bailey's last words to the court had been that he would kill her. The Liberal system said that it would take a chance.”
“Mr. Speaker, I asked a question on food, and in typical Liberal fashion, I got an answer on child care. I am going to ask again. Why is the Prime Minister not only refusing to scrap the fuel standard tax that is driving up food prices but also actually increasing it? This will drive up the cost to grow food, package food and deliver food across the country. Does the Prime Minister want groceries to be a luxury item because luxury is the only thing he knows, while everyday Canadians cannot afford to put food on the table?”
“Mr. Speaker, while families in Kitchener are increasingly using food banks at alarming rates, the government had a chance to lower food prices by scrapping the fuel standard tax. Instead it chose to increase it by another 17¢. This increases the cost of things like coffee, which is already up 34%, and beef, which is up 16%. Why does the Prime Minister seem so determined to drive Canadians into poverty by ignoring skyrocketing food prices while he enjoys a luxury lifestyle hidden from the consequences of his own policies?”
“Mr. Speaker, while Canadians are being forced to choose between heating and eating, the government has chosen to increase our national debt by $80 billion. Can the Prime Minister please explain how driving up debt and increasing the cost of living are going to help the single mom skipping meals, the senior afraid to open their hydro bill or the young family priced out of their new home? Is this just continued economic theatre from a government that has completely lost touch with reality?”
“Madam Speaker, I think that question was just a smokescreen for the fact that the Liberals are not listening to the proper, thought-out amendments being brought forward for this legislation. On that, there is a lack of transparency from the government in not telling Canadians what chain migration is going to do to the systems we currently have in place and what it is going to cost Canadians to do this. It is time for us to work together and listen to all voices of Canadians—”
“Madam Speaker, that is something I did not talk about in my speech, and it is incredibly important. This is a minority government, and opposition parties have worked together to amend this bill. I have to remind the government that it has a minority, and we are working together in opposition and have put time and effort into this. We represent the other voices of Canadians, and it would be very disheartening to Canadians not to hear the voices from the opposition parties, which are working together on this piece of legislation. I would ask the Liberals to listen to the opposition parties and do what is right.”
“Madam Speaker, I congratulate the member opposite's wife for being a graduate of our amazing U of W in Kitchener. The fact of the matter is that the Liberals are not being transparent about what this bill would do and how the chain of migration would bring in extra strain, hurt, crime, and affordability and health care problems, as well as extra wait times at our hospitals. We need to talk more about how the chain migration being proposed in this bill would put extra strain on our country as a whole.”
“On transparency, the minister would have to report annually to Parliament on citizenships granted under Bill C-3 , which would include country of residence and any exemptions to security screening. These amendments are not about exclusion; they are about preserving the integrity of Canadian citizenship. They are about ensuring that every new citizen, whether born here or abroad, shares a real connection to Canada and understands what it means to be Canadian. We must empower newcomers to place the same value on Canadian citizenship that generations before them have held. We must reassure Canadians there is a better way, a way that is fair, principled and rooted in our shared values. Canadian citizenship is not just a passport; it is a promise, a commitment and a privilege earned through dedication, contribution and connection.”
“That is why Conservatives took action. At the immigration committee, we worked constructively to amend Bill C-3 and bring common sense back to our citizenship laws. We introduced amendments to ensure prospective citizens by descent or adoption would go through steps similar to those of naturalized citizens. We have added a residency requirement. Parents would have to demonstrate a consecutive physical presence in Canada equal to that required of naturalized citizens. On language proficiency, they would have to speak English or French unless they are under 18 or over 54. There would be a citizenship test. They would have to understand Canada's history, values and responsibilities. On security screening, they would have to undergo a national security assessment.”
“Immigrants who come to Canada and work hard to earn their citizenship must meet strict residency requirements, pass language and citizenship tests and demonstrate their commitment to Canadian society. They contribute to our communities, our economy and our shared future. Under Bill C-3 , individuals who have never lived here could gain citizenship simply because a parent once did decades ago. That is not fair. It sends the wrong message to newcomers who are doing everything right. It tells them that their hard work is worth less than a technicality. Residents in Kitchener Centre are frustrated. They see their public services, health care, pensions and housing, everything, under strain. They worry that a surge of new citizens living abroad who have never contributed to Canada will stretch those services every further.”
“Under this bill, a child born abroad could gain Canadian citizenship even if their parent spent just a few months here decades ago. That is not a substantial connection. It is not how we build a strong and united country. Conservatives believe in restoring citizenship to lost Canadians, those who were unfairly excluded by outdated laws. We support equal treatment for adopted children, ensuring that all families are treated with dignity and fairness. However, we cannot support a bill that goes far beyond these necessary corrections and opens the door to unlimited chain migration, undermining our national identity and creating a two-tier immigration system. Let us talk about fairness.”
“However, instead of building on that work with care and clarity, the Liberals have chosen to abolish the first-generation limit, a measure introduced by former prime minister Stephen Harper in 2009 to prevent the rise of Canadians of convenience. That measure was never about exclusion. It was about ensuring that Canadian citizenship meant something, that it was earned, not inherited, without connection and that it reflected a real and meaningful bond with our country. Bill C-3 would replace the first-generation limit with a weak substantial connection test: just 1,095 non-consecutive days spent in Canada at any point in a parent's life. There would be no requirement for a criminal background check and no meaningful demonstration of a commitment to Canada. (1020) Let me put that into perspective.”
“These individuals were under deportation orders but have vanished from the system, exposing alarming gaps in Canada's immigration enforcement and border security. This is not just a failure of policy; it is a failure of leadership. Canadians deserve to know that those who pose a threat to public safety are being tracked, detained and deported. lnstead, we are seeing a system where dangerous individuals disappear into our communities, unchecked and unaccounted for. This is yet another example of how the Liberal government has lost control of our immigration system, and it is Canadians who are paying the price. Bill C-3 is just the latest example of the Liberals' misguided approach. lt is a recycled version of Bill C- 71 , with portions hijacked from Senator Yonah Martin's thoughtful and targeted Bill S-245 .”
“This is not just a bureaucratic oversight; it is a shocking failure of basic due diligence. A simple background check would have prevented this, yet the government chooses to rely on the self-disclosure of applicants rather than proactively protecting Canadians. This case has shaken public trust, further highlighting how broken our immigration system has become under this leadership. Canadians deserve a government that puts public safety first, not one that allows dangerous individuals to slip through the cracks. Under the current public safety minister 's watch, 599 foreign criminals slated for deportation have gone missing, including 431 convicted of serious crimes such as sexual assault and violent offences.”
“Now they feel their reputations are being unfairly tarnished by a government that allowed this system to spiral into dysfunction. They deserve better than to be lumped in with the consequences of Liberal mismanagement. They deserve a government that honours their commitment and protects the integrity of Canadian citizenship. Let me be clear that this is not the fault of immigrants. It is the fault of a government that has broken the system. While the Liberals broke it, Conservatives will fix it. Canadians were rightly outraged to learn that a convicted child sex offender listed on the national sex offender registry was granted a Canadian visitor visa despite his criminal history. This individual, who had sexually abused his underage niece, was allowed into our country under the watch of the current federal government.”
“In Kitchener Centre, residents are deeply frustrated by the federal government's failure to manage the international student program. What was once a pathway to great Canadian education has become a cautionary tale of neglect and mismanagement. Let us be clear. This failure is not the fault of our citizens or the students who came here in good faith. It is the government that failed to protect the integrity of our education system, and now our community is left to deal with the consequences. Many first- and second-generation immigrants in Kitchener have shared with me at their doors their deep frustration with the federal government's failed immigration policies. These are individuals and families who came to Canada with hope, worked hard, followed the rules and built lives rooted in contribution and community.”
“Madam Speaker, for generations, Canadian citizenship has been a symbol of pride, opportunity and belonging. It has been the envy of the world, a beacon of hope for those seeking freedom, safety and a better life. Countries around the globe have looked to Canada as a model for how to build a fair, compassionate and principled immigration system, but today, that reputation is destroyed. After a decade of Liberal government, Canadians are rightly concerned, not because of the newcomers who arrive here with hope in their hearts and a desire to contribute, but because of a government that has mismanaged our immigration system, neglected its responsibilities and introduced policies that dilute the very value of Canadian citizenship.”
“Mr. Speaker, every dollar the Liberal government spends comes out of the pockets of Kitchener Centre residents. Hidden, not imaginary, taxes, such as the food packaging tax, are baked into the sticker price, which is driving up the cost of food. Will the Liberals' own numbers show Canadians the $1.3 billion in costs over the next decade for this tax? The more they spend, the more Canadians pay. Will the Prime Minister put partisanship aside and scrap the food packaging tax so Canadians can afford to live?”
“It is time to stop rewarding delay and start demanding results, because in the Waterloo region, unaffordability is not just a talking point; it is real.”
“Mr. Speaker, affordability in the Waterloo region has never been worse. Since 2019, monthly visits to Canada's food banks have more than doubled. In the Waterloo region alone, one in eight families is currently accessing food assistance programs just to feed their families, spending $1,350 a month on groceries alone while housing prices are increasing, yet the Liberal government has failed to deliver. Promises were made, but the supports have never come. Let me quote the Prime Minister : “We will need to do things previously thought impossible at speeds we haven’t seen in generations.” This was during the election. Let me quote him now: “it will take some sacrifices and it will take some time.” Canadians have sacrificed enough. We need leadership that listens, acts and empowers.”
“Mr. Speaker, Canadians are feeling the financial squeeze, not just at the pumps but across the board. While the Liberals claim that these are imaginary taxes, the truth is that there are hidden fuel taxes on buried regulatory fees and carbon pricing, quietly driving up the cost of groceries and transportation. These are not just line items; they are daily realities for working families in Kitchener Centre. Will the Liberals axe their 17¢ fuel tax in their upcoming budget so Canadians can finally afford to live?”
“Mr. Speaker, I am going to make this answer very quick. It has not been dropped. We still support “three strikes and you're out.” The bill that we are debating today is about real bail reform: Bill C-242 , the jail not bail act. Will the member opposite support it?”
“Mr. Speaker, Bill C-242 , the jail not bail act, would stop repeat offenders. I cannot say that enough. A majority of the offences happening in Canada right now are from repeat violent offenders. The bill would help reduce crime by keeping them in jail and not letting them free on the least restrictive conditions. That is what the bill would do to help Canadian families.”