Chak Au
Richmond Centre—Marpole, British Columbia · Conservative · Canada
“Madam Speaker, I rise today to express serious concerns with part 2 of Bill C‑22 and to oppose the motion in Government Business No. 13. Let me be clear from the outset: Conservatives believe that law enforcement must have modern tools to combat organized crime, fentanyl trafficking, child exploitation, terrorism and foreign interference…”
“However, instead of allowing Parliament to complete that scrutiny, the Liberal government has brought forward the motion to force this legislation through before Parliament has properly completed its work. That is precisely backwards.”
“Part 2 would create an entirely new framework governing electronic service providers and compelled assistance. It is this portion of the legislation that has attracted substantial criticism from privacy experts, constitutional experts, technology companies and civil liberties organizations.”
“The Privacy Commissioner was denied the opportunity to appear during clause-by-clause consideration, by Liberal members at the public safety and national security committee, despite being Canada's foremost independent authority on privacy rights. The Canadian Bar Association has also raised concerns regarding the legislation.”
“The government is effectively asking Parliament to conclude that the debate is finished, but the debate is not finished. In fact, it has barely begun. The Minister of Public Safety has changed his position on part 2.”
“Madam Chair, I have to point out that we cannot replace necessity with convenience. It may be convenient for the government to shut down debate in the name of urgency or in the name of saving time. As I mentioned, with a bill that is so complex and sometimes difficult to understand thoroughly, we need the time to do thorough work.”
The complete record
Every one of 204 lines we hold for Chak Au, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 5.
“Madam Speaker, when I read this bill, a word comes to my mind, which is “smokescreen”. I see the Liberal government trying to deceive Canadians by telling them that this is going to help them, but, at the same time, they are doing other things that are going to hurt the economy, hurt people and make life more difficult for Canadians. In this case, they might say that the GST rebate is helpful, but again, it is to a very tiny subgroup of Canadians. It is not helping everybody. It is not helping the people who need help the most. The Liberals are using a smokescreen to pretend they are doing something.”
“Madam Speaker, while I listened to my colleague on the other side, I realized only one thing: The Liberals have copied from policies the Conservatives advocate. In addition, as a city councillor, I have the privilege and advantage of listening to people right on the ground. They are telling me day in day out that they are having a very big problem with affordability, which Bill C-4 would not address.”
“Families in Richmond, Vancouver and across Canada would only continue paying more each and every month. Canadians deserve better than charcoal this Christmas; they deserve a real government with real and honest solutions. Canadians deserve a Conservative government.”
“There are also people who are career transitioning, low-income people, immigrants and people supporting families while trying to survive the government's crumbling economy. The government is closing the door on Canadians trying to pursue a livelihood. The decision would remove opportunities for young Canadians and second-career workers at the exact moment our country needs trained talents the most. The government's claim that Bill C-4 would make life affordable is just theatre, while the budget does the opposite behind the scenes. Education would be harder to access, and training would be more expensive. Bill C-4 promises affordability but would not deliver. It gives pennies while the budget takes dollars. It glitters but hides unrelated privacy changes inside an affordability bill. It would do nothing for struggling Canadians.”
“Why hide the changes inside a bill that Canadians think is about the cost of living? One of the clearest examples of the government's creative accounting and misleading affordability policy is its decision, in the same budget, to eliminate federal student loans for most public career training programs. This is not a small adjustment; it is a war on the working class. These programs train tens of thousands of Canadians every year for jobs we desperately need: health care workers, childhood educators, trades and technical workers, IT and cybersecurity people, hospitality workers, medical administrators and frontline community service staff. Students rely on federal loans because they cannot pay thousands of dollars upfront.”
“It is a gift to Brookfield's bottom line, especially with their pending U.S.-manufactured modular housing project. (1700) Real homebuilding is slowed by red tape, slow approvals and the current government's gatekeeping. Bill C-4 would not fix that. It would not build more livable homes. It would not lower mortgage payments. It would not make rent affordable. Canadians would save a penny while making a buck, and I will add that the pennies do not come free. Inside the affordability bill, the government has hidden that it will weaken privacy protection for federal political parties by exempting them from privacy laws. That has nothing to do with affordability. It is blatant government overreach, a bribe at the expense of Canadians' civic liberties. It is an underhanded fire sale on Canadians' personal and private information.”
“Seniors in Richmond tell me that they are rationing their medication because they simply cannot afford both groceries and prescriptions. I speak with young people who have moved back in with their parents, not because they want to, but because rent in Vancouver and Richmond has become completely out of reach. This is not normal; this is a crisis. If the government has taught Canadians anything at all, it is that just because it glitters does not mean it is made of gold. The GST rebate for first-time homebuyers is a glittering gift with charcoal inside. In Richmond, Vancouver and the vast majority of Canada, almost every new home is above the $450,000 to $550,000 price cap. This measure helps almost no one, not young families, not newcomers and not renters trying to save for a down payment.”
“Canadians do not need pennies or a creative accounting bill; they need a government that understands the real cost of living, rent that does not take up more than half of their income, renewal rates that do not add thousands of dollars a month to mortgages, child care they can afford and groceries that are not so expensive that families need to cut back. Parents should not have to skip meals so their children can eat. This is the reality Canadians face after 10 years of irresponsible Liberal spending. Bill C-4 does not change that reality; it offers scraps off the table of the Liberal government and their friends. Food bank usage in our region is at the highest level ever recorded. Across Canada, food bank visits have more than doubled since 2019, reaching over two million visits a month.”
“The government is boasting a small reduction in the lowest income tax rate, but as the saying goes, “Distant water cannot put out nearby fires.” The actual benefit for most families is tiny. It is a penny of relief while the budget behind the bill brings a dollar of new costs: higher payroll taxes, higher debt servicing costs than Canada spends on health transfers, benefits that fall behind inflation, mortgage renewals that have doubled for many households in Vancouver and Richmond, and the largest deficit outside of the pandemic. Groceries are up, gas is up, insurance is up, child care wait-lists are longer and families are losing their savings and financial security due to the government's fiscal incompetence.”
“After 10 years of the Liberal government, Canadians are living through the worst affordability crisis in over a century. In Richmond, Vancouver and across Canada, families face record food prices and rents, and mortgage payments that have doubled for many households. Young people say that they may never own a home. Seniors tell me they cannot keep up with everyday costs. Newcomers are struggling to build a stable life. Canadians deserve better than theatrical policies; they need real help. The most affordable thing about Bill C-4 , the making life more affordable act, is the title. The truth is that this is not an affordability plan; it is political theatre.”
“Madam Speaker, before I address Bill C-4 , I want to speak about the tragic fire in Tai Po, Hong Kong, which is the deadliest in the city in 77 years. Like many Hong Kong Canadians in Richmond and Vancouver, I immigrated from Hong Kong 37 years ago. I still have family there, including in the affected districts. Many people in our community are grieving and shaken. Let us acknowledge the brave young firefighter, Ho Wai-ho, who lost his life in the line of duty. As a father of a firefighter in Richmond, this loss is deeply personal. My family understands the risks first responders face every single day. Our prayers are with the families who are mourning, with those waiting for news and with a city that is hurting. May they find strength and comfort.”
“Mr. Speaker, families, farmers and businesses, the people who bought and own property in my community of Richmond, are now fearful their titles may no longer be secure because of the Cowichan ruling. Property ownership is one of the core institutions upon which this country is built. The Liberal government's failure to properly fight for and communicate with folks in B.C. has created an environment of fear and dread that they may soon lose their rights over their own property. What will the minister do to ensure that countless B.C. residents will not lose their rights as property owners?”
“Mr. Speaker, British Columbians are now seeing the consequences of the Liberal government's reckless hard-drug decriminalization. Even Premier David Eby has admitted, “I was wrong” and “It was not the right policy.” Communities in Richmond, Vancouver and across the province are experiencing open drug use and rising disorder, and families are increasingly afraid to walk in their own neighbourhoods. This crisis did not happen by accident; it happened because the federal Liberal government granted B.C. an exemption that allowed possession of fentanyl, crack cocaine and meth on our streets. Frontline officers, health experts and local leaders have been pleading for help, yet the government still refuses to take responsibility. Will the Liberals end the hard-drug experiment now?”
“The minister must end this radical hard drug experiment, cancel the federal exemption and restore safety in our communities.”
“Mr. Speaker, the Premier of British Columbia has now admitted what countless frontline workers have been reporting: “I was wrong on drug decriminalization” and “it wasn't the right policy.” He even admitted that it has created “really unhappy consequences” for public safety and community well-being. Allowing possession of such drugs as fentanyl, crack and meth was only possible because the federal government granted B.C. a special exemption under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act. Without the Liberal government's approval, this could never have taken effect, yet the public safety minister still refuses to take responsibility, claiming it was at the request of the provinces. British Columbians deserve real health and safety. They are demanding immediate action.”
“Mr. Speaker, homeowners in Richmond are sounding the alarm. The Cowichan court ruling undermines the principle of private property ownership, and many fear their homes and businesses are at risk. The Liberal government saw this coming and did nothing. There is no explanation, no reassurance and no leadership, and the government remains silent. Richmond is left in the dark. Families are anxious; investors are pulling back, and confidence in our communities is crumbling. Why will the Liberal government not stand up to defend property rights in Richmond and soon across Canada?”
“Mr. Speaker, this is the reality that Canadians are facing right now. When the government is building a bigger and bigger deficit, one day, the debt has to be repaid. That is why taxes are going to be bigger and bigger in the future. As I mentioned, Canadians are already facing the fact that when we earn money, we pay taxes. When we spend money, we have to pay taxes. Even when we save money, we also have to pay taxes. This is the reality the deficit creates. Tax, tax, tax is the daily experience of Canadians.”
“Mr. Speaker, one of the biggest problems with the budget is that it has not addressed the problems that every Canadian is facing right now. The Liberals can promise a lot of things for the future, but they have done nothing about the real problems that Canadians are facing day in and day out. They can promise a hospital, but where are the doctors? Where is the medical staff? They could not even get this problem fixed. They are just giving us another rosy picture so that we can forget what we are suffering right now. This is deceptive.”
“Mr. Speaker, he is right that I have experience in municipal government. This is the biggest difference: In the municipal government, we are not allowed to run a deficit budget. The Liberal government is recklessly running deficit budgets year after year. As I mentioned, the success of a government is not measured by how much it spends. It cannot just throw out money without any concrete results, especially as the Auditor General mentioned that it is a systemic problem. The government spends money without monitoring and without measuring success. I hope that it can learn from the municipal governments in Canada.”
“(1640) They want a plan to stop the revolving door of debt, inflation and ideology, one that replaces it with affordability, accountability and growth.”
“Our plan is clear: We will balance the budget to secure long-term stability, end hidden taxes and scrap the industrial carbon tax, cut wasteful spending and stop corporate welfare, streamline regulations to build homes and attract investment, and restore justice so that those who harm others face real consequences. We will replace the revolving door of ideology with a doorway to growth, accountability and hope. Canada was built by people who worked, saved and built, not by governments that borrowed, taxed and apologized. We were a nation of builders. After 10 years of the Liberal government, we are now a nation that has borrowed $100,000 for every man, woman and child in the country. It must stop. Canadians need more. They need a government that measures success not by how much it spends but by how much it delivers.”
“When regulations stall growth, it creates more. When inflation rises, it prints more. This is motion without direction and activity without achievement. Leadership is not measured by how loudly new programs are announced but by whether those programs actually work. After 10 years of announcements, Canadians are asking a simple question: Where are the results? Conservatives offer a better way: common-sense leadership for all Canadians. We believe prosperity is built, not borrowed; government must live within its means as families do; and work should be rewarded, not taxed into discouragement.”
“Offenders walk free; victims lose faith, and enforcement is ordered to suppress the issue without resolving it. This is the revolving door of justice. It is a system that cycles offenders through courtrooms without consequences while communities are forced to bear the damages and pay the price out of their own pockets. Conservatives will stop this. We will restore mandatory minimums for the worst crimes, use the notwithstanding clause where and when it is absolutely necessary and return the focus of justice to the protection of victims, not the accommodation of offenders. This budget is more than a financial document; it is a mirror reflecting a government trapped by its own ideology. When confronted with failure, it does not change course. It doubles down. When spending fails, it spends more.”
“It is fuelled by the industrial carbon tax, which is a policy that drives up costs for farmers, manufacturers, miners and energy workers while pushing investment abroad. This tax alone adds billions in compliance costs each year, eroding competitiveness and feeding the inflation it claims to fight. The result is a self-perpetuating cycle, a revolving-door economy in which government taxes production, subsidizes dependency and calls it growth. Conservatives will scrap this destructive tax and replace ideology with innovation: practical environmental policy that rewards results, not rhetoric. The same pattern repeats in public safety. The government announces more funding, yet crime keeps climbing because laws remain weak and accountability absent. It spends millions to process crime but refuses to stop it.”
“RBC's “High stakes, narrow margins” report warns that this budget bets everything on “investment-led growth”, a risky gamble that requires $500 billion in new private investment. RBC also notes that the fiscal anchors are thin and that only one-third of new spending is actually productive capital. The rest is political scaffolding: programs designed to look like investment but that function like subsidies. (1635) We have seen this before. The government incubates companies with taxpayer grants, photo ops and headlines. Those firms thrive temporarily and then move to more competitive jurisdictions once the subsidies expire. This is not industrial strategy; this is industrial babysitting.”
“The Liberals claim they are helping the middle class, but what they are really doing is taxing the middle class to death. The only growth they have created is in government bureaucracy, debt and despair. The Prime Minister made five clear commitments six months ago, and he has broken every single one. He promised to cap the deficit at $62 billion, but it is $78 billion. He promised to lower the debt-to-GDP ratio, but both debt and inflation are rising. He promised to spend less, but spending has ballooned by $90 billion, $5,400 per household. He promised to cut municipal homebuilding taxes, but housing costs are higher than ever. He promised to attract investment, but the Royal Bank of Canada confirms investment is collapsing. The government says it is building prosperity, but it is burning through it instead.”
“When we add in provincial and municipal debts, Canadians now carry nearly $100,000 per person in combined public liabilities. This is the real legacy of 10 years of Liberal ideology: a revolving door of borrowing, spending and taxing that spins faster every year while Canadians fall further behind. This budget once again proves that the Liberals never met a tax they did not like. Let me be blunt. This is Canadians' experience. When we earn money, we are taxed. When we spend money, we are taxed. When we save money, we are still taxed. Canadians now pay more and get less. Families are stretched to the breaking point. Young Canadians cannot afford homes. Seniors are cutting back on food and medication. Small businesses are drowning in payroll taxes and red tape.”
“Behind every new announcement lies another layer of debt, money borrowed from the next generation to mask today's problems. The government is not managing the economy; it is borrowing from the future to buy the illusion of progress. Deficits that were once called temporary have become structural. This budget adds $78 billion in new deficit spending, the costliest outside of COVID, and pushes total federal debt to $1.35 trillion. Interest payments on that debt will reach $55.6 billion next year, exceeding both the Canada health transfer and GST revenues. Every dollar Canadians pay in GST now does not go to doctors and nurses but to bankers and bondholders. This is not fiscal stewardship; it is fiscal negligence disguised as compassion.”
“Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Northumberland—Clarke . This year's federal budget is a masterpiece of illusion, a glossy presentation that looks generous on paper but hides a mountain of debt, higher taxes and fewer opportunities. Canadians plainly say the Liberal government is drawing bigger cakes, digging deeper holes and leaving endless debts. Every year, the government paints another picture of prosperity, another big cake of promises. They promise growth, affordability and opportunity, but those promises are baked with borrowed money, frosted with rhetoric and served with no plan to pay the bills. The Liberals call it investing in Canadians. Canadians see it for what it is: a revolving door of borrowed money and recycled failures.”
“I have had the privilege of being part of these initiatives and have seen first-hand not only the heart these faith communities bring to their work, but also the significant difference they make in offering disaster relief, feeding seniors, equipping children with school supplies and helping single mothers. At a time when Canadians are facing a cost of living crisis, undermining the ability of these organizations to serve would be irresponsible. The petitioners therefore urge the government to maintain the charitable status of faith-based organizations so they can continue their invaluable service to Canadians.”
“Madam Speaker, I rise today to present a petition on behalf of Canadians who are deeply concerned about recommendations 429 and 430 of the finance committee's pre-budget report. The petitioners call upon the government to reject these recommendations and to affirm the charitable status of faith-based organizations. Religious charities play a vital role in meeting needs and supporting our most vulnerable. They operate soup kitchens, organize community outreach, provide Christmas hampers and support families in need during the holiday season.”
“Mr. Speaker, I have always felt that we have a system in which the federal government's being ignorant or being incapable of dealing with the issue creates a problem. The problem becomes too big, and the government tries to blame other people. When it cannot blame other people for the consequences, it then tries to do as little as it can to improve the system. This has been going on for years. As I mentioned in my speech, the Conservatives have warned the House many times that the current system, and the previous provisions as passed by the federal government, were not working. I think we are seeing the consequences today.”
“Mr. Speaker, as we have suggested, the people in law enforcement are trying to do the best job they can. However, the present system has their hands tied. The bail system right now is catch-and-release. Prosecutors, as well as judges, are being told they have to release the accused at the earliest possible moment and with the least restrictions. With those kinds of restrictions, how can the judges and the prosecutors do their job? What we have also observed in Bill C-14 is that it is silent on those serious crimes that deserve mandatory sentencing. There are two issues: One is the bail system, and the other is that there are no mandatory sentences for serious crimes, such as those committed by drug kingpins.”
“Mr. Speaker, I hope that my colleague on the other side listened to my speech carefully. I did mention that we cannot change the system through legislation only. We cannot just use promises to change the system. We can make things work better only if the system is being supported with an implementation plan and with resources. That is why I pointed out that we have to give more capacity to Crown prosecutors, to law enforcement and to the people who are out in the community protecting us. Legislative change is important, but there has to be capacity building with it.”
“Canadians have had enough of revolving-door bail, enough of tragic headlines and enough of policies that offer more exit ramps to offenders than pathways to accountability. Let this be the moment we choose differently. Let us send Bill C-14 to committee for further scrutiny. Let us strengthen it, and let us restore the most basic promise any justice system can make to its people: that their safety matters.”
“It is about being serious about protecting the innocent, serious about consequences for the guilty and serious about restoring public faith in a system that too many now see as broken. Justice must be firm, fair and focused. It must prioritize the safety of communities over the convenience of repeat offenders. It must send a clear message that if people endanger others, if they repeatedly violate the law, the consequences will be certain and swift. The bill before us is an opportunity to start sending that message again, but only if we are willing to finish the work. The people of Richmond Centre—Marpole do not want more promises; they want action. They want to know that when a dangerous individual is arrested, the justice system will act to keep them and others safe. They want a government that puts victims first.”
“Third, we need to implement a broader presumption of detention for individuals with violent criminal histories. The public has a right to be protected from those who have repeatedly shown disregard for the law and for human life. Fourth, we must ensure proper support for provincial systems that bear the brunt of these changes. Without investments in Crown capacity, corrections and law enforcement, stricter laws will not translate into better outcomes. This cannot be legislation without resources. Finally, we need transparency. Canadians should know how often bail is granted, how often conditions are breached and how often violent crimes are committed by those already out on release. This information must be reported and made public. Only then can we hold the system accountable. This is not about being tough for the sake of being tough.”
“Those warnings were brushed aside, and while the government hesitated, Canadians suffered. Yes, we support Bill C-14 , but it is the floor, not the ceiling. Conservatives will be pressing for critical amendments. First, we must fully repeal the principle of restraint as outlined in Bill C-75 . It is too vague. It gives too much weight to factors that have nothing to do with risk to the public. Judges must be empowered to detain individuals who pose a threat, not be told to default to release. Second, we must restore mandatory minimum sentences for serious violent offences. The repeal of these sentences under Bill C-5 sent the wrong message: that even the most dangerous crimes might not result in jail time. That approach undermines deterrence and betrays victims.”
“With Bill C-14 , we finally see an acknowledgement that the current approach is not working, that reverse-onus bail provisions are necessary for serious and repeat offenders, that conditional sentences or house arrest for crimes like sexual assault are a gross misplacement of compassion and that sentencing needs to reflect the gravity and frequency of violent crimes. This bill contains good elements. Conservatives welcome those changes, but let us be honest: This is not a product of vision. It is a reaction, one that is long overdue. (1550) For four years, Conservatives have been raising the alarm. We have introduced a private member's bill to strengthen bail. We have stood with victims' families, spoken with law enforcement and warned the House that, without reform, the system will continue to fail.”
“Many feel like they are working in circles, handcuffed to the criminals they repeatedly arrest and to the system they are forced to comply with. Our communities, families, small businesses and seniors are the ones left to deal with the fallout. This is not a local issue. It is a national one. Police chiefs, mayors, premiers and victims' rights groups from across Canada have said the same thing many times, which is that the system is too slow, too soft and too disjointed to protect the people it is supposed to serve. What makes it worse is that for years, these warnings were met without a care. The Liberal government had opportunity after opportunity to course correct. Instead, it offered half measures, like Bill C-48 , which tinkered with language but did not attempt to touch the core issue.”
“It took a system already struggling to keep up with repeat offenders and made it harder for police, Crown prosecutors and judges to do their jobs. Do not take my word for it. Look at the numbers in British Columbia, where there were nearly 4,800 bail hearings in just over a year. Detention was sought in less than a quarter of them. Even in cases involving serious violence, detention was ordered less than half the time. The consequences were predictable and tragic. In the Lower Mainland of British Columbia, we have seen a rise in violent assaults, break-ins and attacks on law enforcement. Officers report rearresting the same individuals multiple times in a matter of weeks. Frontline morale is eroding.”
“Individuals with multiple prior convictions and individuals with active conditions, who are known to law enforcement, are released often within hours of their arrest only to offend again. Some of them rob. Some assault. Some kill. How did we let this become normal? The answer lies in a string of decisions made here in this chamber. Six years ago, the Liberals passed Bill C-75 , which put into legislation what they called the principle of restraint. This principle made release the default. It instructed police and judges to prioritize letting accused individuals go early and with minimal conditions. The intent, we are told, was fairness, equity and efficiency. The reality has been chaos. Bill C-75 shifted the weight of our legal system away from public safety and toward procedural leniency. It was not reform. It was retreat.”
“Mr. Speaker, I am going to share my time with the member for Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge . The Liberal government's complacency has numbed not only itself but the country. When leaders stop reacting to lawlessness, Canadians stop believing it will ever end. In Richmond Centre—Marpole and beyond, I hear it every week: one more violent act, one less ounce of faith. People, and even the officers sworn to protect them, no longer believe their struggle matters. When a community stops expecting accountability, lawlessness becomes the norm. This is not alarmism. It is observation. It is what happens when a justice system meant to serve public safety instead offers repeat violent offenders the benefit of the doubt again and again.”
“Mr. Speaker, I am glad my colleague brought up the issue of youth death and its major causes. He named overdoses as number one, and the second is suicide. In many cases, youth suicide is caused by addiction issues. Does the member mean that the number of deaths related to drugs is bigger than the overdose numbers?”
“Mr. Speaker, as has been pointed out, these kinds of promises and commitments have been recycled many times. If they are very serious about providing the resources and the manpower to strengthen our security system, they should have done so many weeks or months ago and not recycled the same commitment again and again, pretending that they are doing something.”
“Mr. Speaker, we have to protect the rights of Canadians. We cannot accept this power being unchecked. Canadians deserve to have protection within the Constitution. That is why we cannot accept this kind of power being unchecked and being given without any kind of balance.”
“Mr. Speaker, we understand that law enforcement officers need to have the power to do the job in an effective way. However, we cannot accept giving power to the authorities without checks and balances, oversight or judicial review. We cannot give the minister too much power so they can infringe on the freedoms and rights of Canadians.”
“Mr. Speaker, the Liberal government is passing the buck when it creates a problem and then tries to solve the problem it has created. In so doing, it is not only that the Liberals do not do enough, and they do not do it in an effective way, but also that they pass the buck on to somebody else and ask some other people to solve the problem for them. That is not taking responsibility. It is being evasive.”
“We will continue to stand up for the safety and freedoms of Canadians, defend the integrity of our immigration system and fight the scourge of fentanyl with the seriousness it demands. Canada can have security without surveillance and compassion without chaos. That is balance and that is common sense. That is what Conservatives would deliver.”
“It is governance by reaction, not reflection. Canadians expect responsible, balanced legislation that protects both public safety and constitutional freedoms. Conservatives reject the government's approach of overreach first and correction later. We believe law must be grounded in principle, built through consultation, and transparent in application. Conservatives believe in strong borders, safe communities and an immigration system that is both fair and firm, one that welcomes those who follow the rules and holds accountable those who do not. Bill C-12 may have removed the most extreme intrusions, but it still reflects the same pattern: overreach, retreat and repackaging. The bill would fail to address the fentanyl crisis, would fail to fix enforcement gaps and would fail to protect Canadians' privacy rights.”