Michael Guglielmin
Vaughan—Woodbridge, Ontario · Conservative · Canada
“Mr. Speaker, we cannot make this up. The Prime Minister says affordability is the best it has been in a decade. Then ministers in the House rise and take credit for programs they implemented to address all the damage they caused. Their promised surveillance pricing legislation to lower grocery costs will not even take effect before 2028.”
“Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister said that affordability is the best it has been in a decade, but full-time workers are living in RVs and trailers because they cannot afford a home. Families are spending over 120% of their income on rent and food alone. People are even skipping surgeries and other major life events just to survive.”
“Mr. Speaker, in 1952, a courageous 21-year-old woman left her small town in Treviso, Italy, with her father by her side. They boarded a train bound for Genoa. From there, alone, she stepped onto a ship and began that now famous journey across the Atlantic, arriving at Pier 21 in Halifax.”
“Around her table, with a simple tablecloth, good food, candlelight and loved ones gathered close, she showed us what truly mattered. This Italian Heritage Month, I honour all Italian-Canadian nonni , especially my Nonna Olga, whose courage, integrity and love continue to guide us.”
“Mr. Speaker, under the Liberal Prime Minister , Canada is the only G20 country to fall into a recession. Now the Liberals want Canadians arguing over labels: technical recession, marginal recession, full recession. Even the Prime Minister himself admitted a technical recession and a recession are the same thing.”
“Canadians have worked hard, played by the rules and done everything asked of them. They should not be falling further behind because the government cannot control its spending. Canadians need a serious plan to restore growth, protect paycheques and bring hope back to the Canadian economy.”
The complete record
Every one of 299 lines we hold for Michael Guglielmin, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 5 of 6.
“These powers would have allowed the government to collect detailed location and subscriber information without judicial oversight, disregarding basic principles of privacy and due process. The Privacy Commissioner himself confirmed that the government had failed to consult him before pushing these alarming measures, which is a stark reminder of how little regard the Liberals have for Canadians' privacy rights. The clauses within Bill C-2 were sharply criticized for threatening personal privacy and potentially breaching the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, including section 15, the right to be treated equally under the law. This is according to an analysis by the Library of Parliament.”
“At my office, we received numerous calls and have had numerous correspondence with constituents who are deeply concerned with the provisions of Bill C-2, which I will detail later in my speech. The Conservatives played a pivotal role in pushing the government back from its original overreach in Bill C-2 . Part 4 of Bill C-2, for example, would have allowed Canada Post to open any mail without a warrant, which is a flagrant violation of privacy in a country that prides itself on liberal democratic values. Thankfully, this part has been stripped from Bill C-12 , though it is still in Bill C-2 , which remains before Parliament. Similarly, Bill C-2 included sweeping warrantless powers for the government to demand personal data from electronic service providers, banks and telecommunications companies, which was done under parts 14, 15 and 16.”
“Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak to Bill C-12 , the strengthening Canada's immigration system and borders act, a piece of legislation the Liberals have hastily introduced in the wake of Conservative opposition to their previous omnibus bill, Bill C-2 . Before addressing Bill C-12 directly, it is essential to reflect on the deeply flawed Bill C-2 . This omnibus bill, which sprawls across 140 pages and would amend over a dozen pieces of legislation, was a dangerous attempt by the Liberals to consolidate sweeping powers that would trample on Canadians' fundamental rights and freedoms. The bill was so broad and so intrusive that it sparked serious concern not only from Conservatives, but from legal experts, privacy advocates, opposition parties and of course everyday Canadians.”
“Mr. Speaker, while they continually try to distract from their irresponsible policy, we on this side of the House stand united, united against Liberal deficits, against Liberal incompetence and for the Canadian people. For 10 years, the Liberals have promised deficits would lead to investment. Well, Canada had the worst per capita growth in the G7 and a more than 10% drop in investment per worker. That is no surprise to Canadians, though. We have the same government and the same, failed, Liberal policies. Will they finally stop their inflationary deficits so Canadians can afford to live?”
“Mr. Speaker, we will take no lessons from the Liberals on bail reform, when because of their laws, in places like Vancouver, the same 40 criminals were arrested 6,000 times in one year. The Liberals claim they are consulting on bail reform, but Canadians are not waiting for meetings; they need action now. Since weak Liberal laws have been put on the books, violent crime is up 50%. Innocent people are dying. Bailey McCourt was murdered just hours after her abuser was released on bail. How many more victims will it take? Will the Prime Minister do the right thing, scrap Liberal bail and stop obstructing, or will he get out of the way so we can do it for him?”
“Mr. Speaker, weak Liberal bail laws like Bill C-75 require courts to release repeat violent offenders at the earliest possible opportunity and under the least onerous conditions. Just days ago, a man in York was violently injured during a home invasion, and one of the accused was already out on bail for crimes as serious as attempted murder. The Prime Minister promised Liberals would flip-flop on bail, but that was just the same old Liberal trick; everyone knows it, the one where they promise one thing but do nothing. Liberal bail laws are still on the books six months after the Prime Minister took power. Will the Prime Minister scrap Liberal bail, or get out of the way so we can do it for him?”
“Mr. Speaker, there seems to be a theme emerging. We have capital flight at an alarming rate in the country. We have a productivity crisis. From the Liberals on the other side of the aisle, all we hear is that it is not their fault. I am wondering if the Leader of the Opposition could highlight all of the negative consequences of Liberal policy and the one simple thing they could do to fix them.”
“There has been enough delay and obstruction. If they do not want to introduce the legislation, they can get out of the way and we will do it for them.”
“Mr. Speaker, I was on the member's website, and it reminded me of a simpler time in this country, one that made sense, when criminals were kept behind bars and repeat offenders were kept in prison. We hear from the member nothing but excuses for the delays. Crime is not a new problem in this country. The rise in crime has been going on for years at this point, and we have heard, as I said in my earlier remarks, from police associations; we have heard from police chiefs; and we have heard from municipal and provincial governments. We have heard from every stakeholder. The only stakeholder that has been committed to delays is the federal government. The only stakeholder that does not want to move and get this done so citizens can feel safe and secure in their own homes and their own communities seems to be the government.”
“We can end the principle of restraint, create a new category for major offences and bring in the bail reform this country so desperately needs. Given how important it is that we fix this mess quickly, yesterday we tried to pass a motion to fast-track our jail not bail act and send it to committee. We committed to working extended hours. We will do whatever it takes. Unfortunately, the Liberals voted against our motion, once again prioritizing criminals over victims. Just last week, we heard from the Prime Minister that they want to get tough on crime. If that is the case, why are they standing in the way? Why does the government pretend to be tough on crime while standing in the way of our plan to prioritize victims over criminals and keep repeat offenders behind bars?”
“If this truly was a priority for the Liberals, they would have introduced bail reform in the spring or, at the very least, right at the start of this fall session, but they did not. We have seen their priorities. We have seen them prioritize banning people from buying cars from one another for $10,000 in cash or more, prioritize lowering the threshold for what constitutes hate speech and prioritize confiscating firearms from law-abiding citizens, all in the name of combatting gun crime, despite the fact that police tell us 90% of gun crimes are committed with illegal firearms coming over the border with the United States. Everyone seems to know what the problem is, except for the Liberal government. That is why we introduced our jail not bail act.”
“Police chiefs, police associations, provincial governments, victims' groups and municipal governments are all begging for action, and what do we keep hearing from government members? They tell us not to worry as bail reform is coming. When? We have yet to hear of a date for this bill. There are also zero details about what is actually in the bill. Will the government get rid of the principle of restraint from Bill C-75 , which compels judges to release offenders under the least onerous conditions at the earliest opportunity? Will the Liberals finally admit that their ideological approach to criminal justice is flawed and that it prioritizes violent criminals over victims?”
“They are frustrated because of the lack of action by the Liberal government. It is not just the Conservatives who have been raising the alarm for years about the Liberals' failed bail laws. lt is the everyday person at the local bakery in my riding, or the mother and father shopping at the grocery store. Even the mayor of Vaughan said this about yesterday's shooting: “These instances are a direct result of a broken criminal justice system that catches and releases repeat offenders instead of keeping them behind bars.... We need stronger and tougher laws and real bail reform from the Federal government immediately.” Everyone, and I mean everyone, wants the Liberal government to act.”
“Mr. Speaker, I recently had the opportunity to rise in this chamber and ask the Secretary of State for Combatting Crime about the rampant crime on the streets in my community and across this country. At the time, Vaughan had seen seven shootings in just three weeks. Since I asked my question, there have been three more shootings, one of them as recently as yesterday in the early morning hours in the area of Thornhill Woods. It was just another day in Vaughan, where gunshots rang out while families were asleep in their beds. We know that so much of the rampant criminality on our streets is a direct consequence of weak Liberal soft-on-crime laws and catch-and-release policies that keep repeat violent offenders out of jail and on our streets. People are afraid. They are scared and they are frustrated.”
“Mr. Speaker, there seems to be a theme emerging with the government, and that theme is the expansion and creation of more and more government bureaucracy. I wonder if my colleague could highlight one more time for the House why, at a time when the Parliamentary Budget Officer has raised the alarm about the government's spending, we do not need any more government bureaucracy when the checks and balances already exist in government.”
“Mr. Speaker, the Privacy Commissioner highlighted several amendments that did not make it into the bill. We all know that cybersecurity threats are a very serious issue that we need to work diligently on, but privacy is paramount. Would the member agree that improvements should be made to the bill in the committee process?”
“Mr. Speaker, bail reform is upon us right now. We introduced the jail not bail act. We have brought an opposition day motion forward to ask the House to expedite this bill so it can be studied at committee. As I said before, this should be a non-partisan issue. We hear over and over again that everyone is in favour of bail reform. Will the Liberals get out of the way and pass our bill so we can keep communities safe?”
“Mr. Speaker, our party, as we put forward in our jail not bail act, would like to remove the principle of restraint being introduced for repeat violent offenders. We would like to keep repeat violent offenders in prison. We would like to have mandatory minimums on serious offences like human trafficking, sexual violence and extortion. We believe that violent criminals need to be kept in prison, not given the principle of restraint. We do not need a revolving door in our justice system. We need to keep these people off the streets so our citizens, communities, friends and neighbours can feel safe in their country again.”
“Mr. Speaker, maybe I was not clear in my remarks during my speech. People in this country are legitimately afraid. They are losing trust in the very notion of justice in this country. They have faced repeated hurdles and delays from the government. For the last six years, it has failed to act to address the very serious concerns of citizens, police associations, police departments and mayors all across this country. The reason the Conservatives are acting with urgency is that this is an urgent problem and someone needs to stand up for the rights of the people of this country.”
“Mr. Speaker, for years now, police associations, mayors and individuals across this country have been demanding bail reform. Violent crime is surging. Over and over again we see the same story: Repeat violent offenders are out on bail committing crimes and terrorizing our citizens. If the Liberals wanted to act and had a sense of urgency, they would have introduced bail reform at the beginning of the session of Parliament, but clearly they continue to delay. If they want to do what is right, they can step aside and allow us to introduce legislation and fix the problem for them.”
“Every day, Canadians wake up and see another headline about a violent shooting. Tomorrow, many Canadians will wake up and their car will be stolen from their driveway. We have a job to do on behalf of the people who sent us here. The government's primary responsibility is to keep Canadians safe. It is time to put victims ahead of criminals and violent criminals behind bars, where they belong. That is why I encourage every member of this House to support my colleague's bill, Bill C-242 , the jail not bail act. It is very important that we stand up for our communities and the people of this country and put repeat violent offenders behind bars.”
“In that time, violent crime has surged and innocent Canadians have paid the ultimate price. I have heard Liberal members say they are going to introduce stronger bail laws, except they have not, even though we know what is needed because we have heard it from every single corner of this country. What we do not need is more Liberal reforms. We need to scrap Liberal bail and restore safety on our streets. If the Prime Minister and Liberal members of the House are serious about restoring peace to our communities, they will back this bill, reverse their disastrous bail laws and tip the scales of justice back in favour of innocent Canadians. If they do not want to support the bill for political purposes, they can abstain and let it pass so people in this country can have a sense of security again.”
“It stated: The proposed ideas will put victims and communities first, restoring the balance that is desperately needed at a time when youth violence and gun crimes are out of control and innocent victims are paying the ultimate price. We would encourage all levels of government to set aside their political differences and do what's right. After the horrific murder of Aleem Farooqi in my community of Vaughan, Vaughan's mayor, Steven Del Duca, called on the federal government for urgent bail system reform, stating, “I am calling on the Prime Minister to show leadership and to urgently overhaul the system”. I will repeat that this is not a partisan issue. People's lives are at risk every single day the government delays. the Prime Minister and Minister of Justice have spent the last six months spiralling, dithering and failing to act.”
“Third, it would strengthen bail laws by mandating judges to consider an accused's full criminal history and would prevent anyone from getting bail who was convicted of a major offence in the last 10 years and is charged with a major offence while out on bail. Fourth, it would prohibit anybody with an indictable conviction from acting as a guarantor, would require judges to enforce bail conditions on guarantors and would require non-residents to surrender their passport upon request. Do not take our word for it. Take it from Cait Alexander, a survivor of domestic violence who runs the organization End Violence Everywhere: “The Jail Not Bail Act is therefore more than legislation—it is an essential corrective—a lifeline capable of disrupting the revolving door of abuse and saving innocent lives.” How about the Toronto Police Association?”
“(1610) The Conservatives are here to say that in order to stop this chaos on our streets, keep repeat violent offenders in jail and keep Canadians safe, we must pass my hon. colleague from Oxford 's bill, the jail not bail act, Bill C-242 . What would the jail not bail act do? First, it would repeal the Liberal principle of restraint and replace it with a directive that the primary consideration is the protection and safety of the public. Second, it would introduce a new major offence category with reverse onus bail conditions for firearm, sexual assault, kidnapping, human trafficking, home invasion, robbery, extortion, arson and assault charges.”
“Today, the Conservatives have introduced a motion in the House of Commons. For people tuning in from my community, the motion reads as follows: That, given that, (a) violent crime is up 55% under the Liberal government and repeat offenders continue to be released because of Liberal catch and release laws; and (b) the Liberal government promised to pass criminal justice reform six months ago but has failed to do so; in order to keep repeat offenders in jail and keep Canadians safe, the House is of the opinion that Bill C-242, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Department of Justice Act, also known as the Jail Not Bail Act, must pass and is committed to sitting extended hours, holding an expeditious committee study and undertaking such other procedural measures as may be necessary to pass it at the earliest opportunity.”
“Premiers, mayors, police associations, attorneys general and Canadians have been asking for the federal government to end catch-and-release bail laws like Bill C-75 , a law that forces judges to apply the principle of restraint, which puts repeat violent offenders back on the streets, and Bill C-5 , which repealed mandatory jail time for serious gun crimes, including extortion with a firearm. We all know the consequences. Since these laws were introduced, all across Canada, violent crime is up by 55%, firearm crime is up by 130%, extortion has skyrocketed by 330%, sexual assaults are up by 76% and homicides are up by 29%. In 2019, David Lametti, now the Prime Minister 's right-hand man, passed Bill C-75 , forcing judges to release offenders at the earliest opportunity under the least onerous conditions.”
“The shootings happened only minutes apart, and both of these homes had been shot earlier the same month. That means the residents have now lived twice through violent attacks. Recently in Vaughan, three suspects were arrested for committing a series of home invasions, and two of these suspects were already out on bail. What happened? The Liberals introduced bail reform with Bill C-5 and Bill C-75 , and these Liberal bail laws have completely broken our bail system. What needs to change? Today, this is exactly what we are here to address. This is far from a partisan issue.”
“I was born and raised in Vaughan—Woodbridge, a place that has always been to me the perfect place to raise a family. In my youth and early adult life, it was a community where I felt safe, where people would walk around at night without fear. They would not worry if they had forgotten to lock their doors, and they would go to bed knowing they were safe in their own beds. However, over the last decade, that sense of security has been shattered. My friends in my community no longer feel safe walking at night. When our youth go to school, they face threats of gun violence, stabbings and assaults. Our seniors are anxious, wondering if their cars will be on the driveway when they wake up in the morning. Just last Wednesday, two homes fell prey to shootings.”
“In my community, everybody knows someone who has had a car stolen. In fact, in the last eight weeks, York Region has seen 296 vehicle thefts. How about gun violence? In the last eight weeks, we have had 10 shootings and a bank robbery. Last month, I attended a press conference in Vaughan—Woodbridge, joined by the Leader of the Opposition , fellow Conservative members of Parliament and victims of crime, and we attempted to address this very issue. The message was clear. Something needs to be done. Something needs to change in this country. For far too long now, I have heard horror stories in my community of citizens being terrorized, their homes being broken into, their cars getting broken into and their loved ones being fatally shot. People are genuinely afraid. They are afraid in their own homes and afraid in their own communities.”
“Mr. Speaker, imagine for a moment a father sleeping peacefully at home with his wife and kids, when violent thugs kick in their door and break into their home. He does what any husband would do: He tries to protect his family. Then he is fatally shot and murdered. This is not a scene from a Hollywood production; this was the reality for Aleem Farooqi and his family in Vaughan when Aleem was gunned down defending his family, a true hero. Imagine someone waking up in the morning in their home to find out that their car in the driveway, right below where their children sleep, was almost stolen the night before. That is what happened to me back in August of this year, and I am not special. This has happened to numerous people in Vaughan—Woodbridge and thousands of Canadians all across this country.”
“Mr. Speaker, the only thing the Liberals seem to do with any speed around here is to manufacture excuses for their inaction. Meanwhile, in the last eight weeks, York Region has seen 914 assaults, 296 vehicle thefts and 174 break and enters. We know what to do. Mayors, police chiefs and Canadians all across this country have been calling on the Liberal government to scrap its failed bail laws, Bill C-5 and Bill C-75 . Canadians are watching. Will the Prime Minister do the right thing and scrap Liberal bail laws or get out of the way so Conservatives can do it for them?”
“Mr. Speaker, Liberal bail has unleashed crime and chaos in our streets. Their weak law, Bill C-75 , requires courts to release repeat violent offenders at the earliest opportunity. Recently, three suspects were arrested for a series of home invasions in Vaughan. Guess what. Surprise, surprise, two of them were out on bail. The Prime Minister promised Liberals would flip-flop on bail, but six months after he came to power, weak Liberal laws are still on the books. Will he do the right thing and scrap Liberal bail or get out of the way and let us do it?”
“Madam Speaker, it seems the only thing new about the government is the way it avoids responsibility. Yesterday, the Parliamentary Budget Officer said, “as anyone who has managed a household budget knows...at the end of the month [when] you don't have enough money to pay your bills...something's going to break.” Let me tell members what is breaking. It is is the morale of families that are going hungry. Beef is up 33%, soup is up 26% and grapes are up 24%, and there will be a projected four million visits to Toronto food banks. The Prime Minister claimed to be an economic expert, yet his broken promises have doubled the deficit and driven up food prices. When will he admit that his fiscal failures are starving families of hope?”
“Madam Speaker, I do not know what the minister is rejoicing about because prices are skyrocketing, food banks are overwhelmed and families are skipping meals. Meanwhile, the Parliamentary Budget Officer called the government's finances “shocking” and “unsustainable” and warned that “something's going to break”. Every dollar the Liberal Prime Minister spends comes out of the pockets of Canadians. When will the Prime Minister stop his money-printing deficits that drive inflation and admit that his broken promises have left Canadians hungry?”
“The Prime Minister 's doublespeak promises one thing but delivers the opposite. When will he stop deceiving and start delivering?”
“Madam Speaker, the Prime Minister 's promises are like George Orwell's doublespeak: say one thing and mean another. Let us take a look at some examples. The Prime Minister promised the fastest-growing economy in the G7; he delivered the fastest-shrinking economy. He promised grocery prices would judge him; he delivered skyrocketing food costs. He promised “build, baby, build”; he has delivered “block, baby, block”. He promised nation building at unimaginable speed; he delivered zero permits. He promised “spend less, invest more”; he is about to deliver the highest deficit in Canadian history. He promised a trade deal with the U.S. by July 21; he delivered higher tariffs. He promised “elbows up”; he has delivered “elbows down”. The Prime Minister promised a departure from Trudeau. Well, at least he got that one right; he is worse.”
“Madam Speaker, it is an honour to rise today on behalf of my constituents in Vaughan—Woodbridge to present a petition brought forward by @notonjoeswatch and other members of our community with regard to crime. Like many places in this country, Vaughan has experienced heightened levels of crime. In the York Region, violent crime is up 58%, home invasions are up 82% and carjackings are up 300%. The petitioners are calling for the Liberal government to immediately repeal Bill C-5 , which revoked mandatory minimum penalties for some serious offences, and Bill C-75 , which forces judges to apply the principle of restraint for early release on serious offences. Petitioners also call for the introduction of mandatory minimum penalties and a serious offence category. I support the petitioners. It is time that we get serious on crime.”
“Mr. Speaker, leaked audio from the Minister of Public Safety revealed the truth: Not even he believes the Liberal gun confiscation program will work. He begged a law-abiding citizen, “Don't ask me to explain the logic to you”. He knows it is wrong, and he admits the Prime Minister is forcing him to ram this failed policy through, even though he knows it will not fix their soft-on-crime record. Why is the minister still proceeding with this $742-million boondoggle when even he admits it is a failure?”
“Mr. Speaker, in just three weeks, Vaughan has seen seven shootings, seven incidents of violent crime. Since the Liberal government changed bail laws, violent crime is up by 50%. Our Conservative motion calls for a “three strikes and you're out” law to keep repeat violent offenders in jail. Why is the Liberal government waiting until next month to introduce bail legislation, putting more Canadians in danger every day? The Prime Minister 's failure to act is a betrayal of the victims of crime. When will the Liberals stop obstructing so people can feel safe in their own homes?”
“Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister once said that Canadians would judge him by the cost of groceries. Well, beef is up 33%, coffee is up 22% and sugar is up by 20%. Food inflation has risen by 40%. Canadians in Vaughan—Woodbridge and across the country feel the pinch every single time they walk into the grocery store. A new report shows that over 25% of households are struggling to afford food, which is up from 18% in 2023. At Toronto's food bank, it took nearly four decades to reach one million visits, yet in only three years, demand has quadrupled to four million visits. The poverty rate has climbed for the third straight year, and is now sitting at 9.9%, increasing by 38% from just two years ago. That is not just a number. It is a crisis that is unfolding in real time.”
“Madam Speaker, my colleague's speech was excellent. She mentioned something about the rising crime in Vaughan—Woodbridge. People are legitimately afraid in their own home in our community, and I was wondering whether my colleague could elaborate on the lack of attention that has been paid since the election, frankly, and long before that, to this very serious issue.”
“Mr. Speaker, as I said in my speech, when it comes to Canadian citizenship, it should really reflect what it means to be a Canadian, to be committed to a country, to live within a country, to contribute to a country and to share the values of a country. It would be unfortunate to see Canada go the way of postnational identity, where citizenship is no longer connected to our country and is, in fact, multiple times removed from people who contribute and actively participate here.”
“Mr. Speaker, as the bill addresses, there are cases where people are abroad serving the Crown, and there should be allowances made in those instances, but they should not be broad. We should not be opening the floodgates in all cases. We are specifically talking about people who are serving the Crown abroad, and that should be applied to them.”
“Conservatives do not want to throw this bill out. They want to fix it. Here are some things we can do. We can require consecutive physical presence in Canada. We can also require criminal background checks to prevent dangerous individuals from gaining automatic citizenship. Conservatives support targeted fixes, not ideological overreach. We are prepared to work constructively to amend and improve this bill for the good of all Canadians. Citizenship is not just paperwork; it is a commitment to a country, its values, its people and its future. We should be proud to offer citizenship to those who love and contribute to this country, but we also have a duty to protect the value of what Canadian citizenship means. Conservatives will not support Bill C-3 in its current form, but we are ready to work in good faith to improve it.”
“As immigration lawyer Krisha Dhaliwal put it, “details have not been provided regarding what kinds of evidence will be required to demonstrate the 1,095 cumulative days of physical presence in Canada.” Let me be clear. Conservatives support the restoration of lost Canadians. Conservatives support equal treatment for adopted children. However, this bill goes far beyond that. Why? Why can the Liberal government not just address the issues at hand? Why expand this legislation with an ideological stance on postnational citizenship and include something that would only weaken our country? Bill C-3 would erode the value of Canadian citizenship. It would create a new system that further undermines our national identity by not requiring adequate connection to our country and would add constraint to our already broken system.”
“Who will pay for this? Canadians would, through our health care system, our pensions and our already stretched housing market. I cannot help but be reminded of how the government has broken the immigration system. I heard from countless people in my community of Vaughan—Woodbridge that they cannot afford an immigration system that drives up unemployment. They are tired and frustrated, and citizens want parliamentarians to apply reason and logic when enacting legislation. They want us to ensure that no more unnecessary burdens are placed on our country. Speaking of burdens, how about the administrative burdens of the bill? IRCC officials could not even guess how many proof-of-citizenship applications would flood an already overburdened system.”
“Weak soft-on-crime laws have caused a wave of crimes unleashed in places like my riding of Vaughan—Woodbridge. There are shootings, home invasions, murders and car thefts, all because of an ideological approach to justice and changing bail laws, making it easier for criminals to get out of jail and reoffend. We must be very careful to ensure that background checks and conviction screenings are not overlooked. It is crucial to include this provision and make the necessary changes to this bill. The government has not even provided a ballpark estimate of how many people would be granted citizenship under this bill. The Parliamentary Budget Officer estimates that its predecessor bill, Bill C-71 , would have created 115,000 new citizens outside Canada in just five years. With no upper limit, the number could multiply for generations.”
“(1705) Under Bill C-3 , anyone born outside of Canada to a Canadian citizen could automatically get citizenship as long as that person has spent just 1,095 non-consecutive days in Canada at any point in their life. There is no requirement for recent presence in the country, no requirement for the person to have a connection to the country today and no requirement for background checks. I will say that again: There are no criminal background checks. This is ridiculous. At a time when Canada has experienced a 55% increase in crime since the Liberals took office, we must, as parliamentarians, ensure we are doing our due diligence to maintain public safety. In fact, Canadians expect us to do so. We have seen what has happened over the last 10 years when Liberal governments do not properly consider legislation before it is enacted.”
“Instead of respecting the original intent of that bill, the Liberals, with the support of their NDP partners, expanded it dramatically. What started as a responsible, narrowly focused piece of legislation became a sweeping change of how citizenship is passed down across generations. The government claims these changes are necessary to respond to a court decision from December 2023, where the Ontario Superior Court ruled against parts of the first-generation limit on citizenship for children born abroad, but instead of appealing that decision or addressing the court's concern with limited rational fixes, the government chose to use it as its reason to open the floodgates.”