Costas Menegakis
Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, Ontario · Conservative · Canada
“Mr. Speaker, last year we lost 5,630 Canadians to the opioid crisis. That is 15 lives lost every day. Emmy Liu, 14 years old, was one of the increasingly alarming number of young Canadians whose lives were stolen by the fentanyl traffickers.”
“Mr. Speaker, this bill seeks to criminalize anyone who dares to quote from scripture, a religious text, and that is crossing the line, as far as I am concerned and as far as a lot of Canadians are concerned. It is the difference between the state and religion, the state and faith.”
“Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister 's luxurious travel around the world has racked up a nearly $1-million catering bill. That is enough to feed a family for 55 years. While the Prime Minister eats five-star meals, Canadians are struggling.”
“Madam Speaker, the bill would basically strip away the right of a person to quote from their holy text. It would open the door to criminalizing people for uttering words that they are reading from their holy text.”
“Mr. Speaker, record-high youth unemployment in Canada is a direct result of the Liberal government's reckless immigration policies. By flooding the labour market with temporary foreign workers and residents, the current government has created a wage-suppressing crisis.”
“Now the Liberal government has launched an international campaign to recruit more foreign students to Canada who compete with Ethan and other young Canadians who are struggling to find work. The Liberal government should stop pandering to lobbyists and start putting Canadians first.”
The complete record
Every one of 267 lines we hold for Costas Menegakis, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 6.
“I would ask the member this simple question: Why does he think the Liberals have totally ignored this issue, which is a very important issue for the people of Mirabel and, indeed, the people of Quebec?”
“Mr. Speaker, that was a very impassioned speech. Obviously, our colleague cares very much about the subject and the constituents in his riding. I am keenly aware of the Mirabel situation, being a Quebecker myself and having been born in Montreal, but I want to highlight once again that it was Brian Mulroney, a Canadian prime minister who, in his very first term, returned 80% of those lands. It was another Canadian prime minister in his first term, Stephen Harper, who made restitution with the other 11,000 acres, which were returned to the rightful owners. In between, we have had numerous years of Liberal governments that have totally ignored the subject. I am kind of taken aback by the member from the Liberal Party who is trying to change the subject and not deal with the issue at hand.”
“Mr. Speaker, in the last year, new home sales are down across the country. They are down 45% in the GTA, 52% in the Golden Horseshoe and 56% in Vancouver. The Canadian Home Builders' Association said that allowing these sale conditions to continue will create a lost decade for home ownership in Canada. The Prime Minister promised that the Liberals would help Canadians buy their first homes, but home sales have plummeted during his time as Prime Minister and young Canadians are losing hope. When will the Liberals adopt our plan to remove the HST from all new home builds so more Canadians can afford to buy a home?”
“Mr. Speaker, what we have seen consistently in this Parliament is the disrespect of the government for the democratic process. Government members claim they want committees to bring forth meaningful amendments, but they vote down amendments. They claim they want things to go to committee, but they shut down committee meetings. Now the PMO has given a directive to the Liberal House leader and all the committee chairs to muzzle Parliament by eliminating committee meetings, by basically not having them. I wonder if the member can share his thoughts on how he thinks this is helping democratic voices in Canada.”
“Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. The member opposite made a speech. It was not a question. When it is questions and answers, members are supposed to ask questions and not give a speech. If he wants to speak on the subject, he is welcome to go on the order—”
“Madam Speaker, time and time again we have heard the member for Winnipeg North referring in the House to committees. In previous sessions he has gotten up and asked us to bring any recommendations we have to committee for the committee to discuss. When we do that, even though they pass through committee, they come into the House and the Liberal Party, along with its friends in the NDP, votes down our recommendations and our amendments. Today the member for Winnipeg North is standing in his place and saying we should pass the budget implementation bill, which is not an implementation bill, and pass it on to committee, yet the Liberals have shut down committees; they cannot meet. No committees are meeting this week, because the Liberals have shut them all down. Quite simply, what does the hon. member think the Liberals are hiding?”
“Madam Speaker, it is a little rich to hear Liberal colleagues in this chamber talk about accountability and transparency when they are presenting a budget implementation bill for a budget that was supposed to begin on April 1 of this year. The better part of eight months has already transpired. Now, they want us to vote on a budget after they have already spent eight months' worth of the money. Does the member think it is normal for Parliament or any organization to budget after it has spent the money?”
“Mr. Speaker, last year, over half the people who became Canadian citizens did so by clicking a box online. That is crazy. There is no justification for this. In-person citizenship ceremonies are an essential unifying bedrock of Canada's civic life. Swearing the oath of citizenship in front of an official should be upheld as an integral part of committing to the responsibilities that come with being Canadian. Will the minister immediately end one-click, virtual citizenship ceremonies?”
“Madam Speaker, earlier, I asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister if he thought the 13.6¢ per day that a single senior in this country is going to get as relief through this particular budget bill they are putting through is enough for a single senior who is struggling to pay for their groceries. When they go to the grocery store, they are making a decision as to whether they should buy less or they should eat less quality and less quantity, so that they can afford to live. Does the member think roughly 13.5¢ a day is enough money to give support to a senior who has contributed to this country all of their life?”
“I have numbers here from the Parliamentary Budget Officer. What he said is that a single senior in the first income bracket would benefit from this budget, from these moves, to the tune of $50 a year. Someone who has contributed all of their lives is going to get 13.6¢ a day. Can the member opposite tell me if he thinks 13.6¢ a day for a single senior on a very low income is enough money, is enough support from a government?”
“Madam Speaker, I listened attentively to the member's speech. He invoked the name of former prime minister Stephen Harper on several occasions. What he conveniently forgot to mention, of course, is that in 2015, under the Harper government, we had a balanced budget in this country. That means that every dollar we took in we spent, but we did not spend more than what we took in. He also referred to support for the budget and that he wants the Conservatives to support this budget moving forward. What the Liberals are doing, in effect, is trying to fool Canadians. The fiscal year started April 1. They have already spent eight months' of the money. Now they are saying if we do not vote for it we are not supporting it. They have already spent that money. More importantly, he also mentioned the Parliamentary Budget Officer.”
“Mr. Speaker, hard-working Canadians are struggling, lining up at food banks and paying eye-wateringly high Liberal taxes. Do members know who is not struggling? The Prime Minister , his corporate elite buddies and Brookfield are not. As Canada's number one tax-dodger, Brookfield has avoided paying $6.5 billion in taxes. That is enough to buy a week's worth of groceries for every single Canadian. In case Brookfield's tax-dodging was not enough, now the Prime Minister is handing it Canadian taxpayers' hard-earned money. We learned that the European Space Agency received a $500-million contract. What was hidden was that 50% of the Harwell campus, where the European Space Agency is located, is owned by Brookfield. The out-of-touch Prime Minister 's record is to ship jobs out of the country and chase away investment.”
“Mr. Speaker, in one costly budget, the high-spending Liberals have managed to max out our great-grandchildren's credit cards. The parliamentary fiscal watchdog is not the only one ringing alarm bells. Fitch Ratings, the agency that gives the government its credit score, says that since the Liberal government frequently blows through its fiscal anchors, “federal finances run a high risk of further deterioration.” Fitch is concerned. The parliamentary fiscal watchdog is sounding the alarm. How many more fiscal watchdog reports is it going to take for the Prime Minister to rein in his costly credit card spending?”
“Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister 's costly credit card budget loads today's reckless spending onto tomorrow's taxpayers. After 10 years of the tired Liberals, Canadians are putting nearly 50% more of their expenses on their credit cards than in 2015. The parliamentary fiscal watchdog is ringing the alarm bell, saying, “With Budget 2025 the Government abandoned the previous fiscal anchor to reduce the federal debt-to-GDP ratio over the medium term.” It is no wonder the costly Prime Minister wants to fire him. How many more fiscal watchdog reports is it going to take for the Prime Minister to rein in his costly credit card spending?”
“Madam Speaker, it is a formula for bankruptcy. That is what this is, but the government does not seem to care. It just passes on the debt to our children, to future generations and to our seniors, who cannot afford to eat. Children are walking into food banks hungry. The Liberals are very good at heckling, but the bottom line is this: Canadian families are suffering, and 24,000 children are walking into a food bank hungry today. This is a good question. A business goes bankrupt if it spends more than it earns. That is business 101. That is a lesson the Liberal Party and the Liberal government have never learned, and they have shown no indication that they have the capacity to learn it.”
“Madam Speaker, my hon. colleague is right. There is precious little in this budget that deals with the actual problem we have with housing, with health care and with employment. On the justice issue, I live in a community where in the last 60 days we have had two murders on the quiet streets of Richmond Hill. I was also looking in the budget to see if we got some kind of relief, focus or attention regarding how our justice system runs in this country, but unfortunately it is not in there. This is a document full of rhetoric that does not respond to that. The issue of immigration is a big problem in this country, but on page 311, which scantily addresses the issue, the top line says the Liberals are going to reduce the resources for immigration, because they are going to be imposing a 15% cut on the department. This is ridiculous.”
“Madam Speaker, the member is sad that I mentioned the name Trudeau. Whether he likes it or not, he is part of that party. He thinks this is a new government, but it does not take a genius to look at the front bench and see the musical chairs the Liberals played, with ministers being in different positions. It is obvious. The Minister of Finance today was the former minister of industry. I look back and forth, and what they have done is played musical chairs with the front bench. Shame on them. We are talking about producing something, a budget, that will address the needs of Canadians. Playing politics on that is shameful on behalf of that party and the Liberal government.”
“They stand up in the House and manoeuvre back and forth, and the worst thing of all is that the Liberal Party is the only party in this House that has uttered the word “election”. God forbid that we do not want to put $324 billion of additional debt on our children; the Liberals say it is because we want an election. They are out of touch with Canadians. They do not know what people are dealing with. I myself would argue vociferously that a government has a responsibility to produce a document and spend the finances of this country in a way that benefits the Canadian people, Canadian families and Canadian businesses.”
“I have heard people stand on the other side and talk about Stephen Harper. Guess what. Mr. Harper, who was an outstanding prime minister, has not been here for 10 years. I notice the Liberals conveniently forget the 10 years they stood up in the House and spoke vociferously in support of Prime Minister Trudeau and all the additional debt he put on this country and the mess he created in pretty much every file, including, of course, immigration. Speaking of immigration, we have international students and temporary foreign workers, all of whom are taking jobs our youth could take today. In closing, in the minute I have left, I will say that the Liberals continue down this path of bringing folks into this country who take jobs away from our children, and down the path of imposing costs on Canadians that do not need to be there.”
“Children do not have enough food to eat, and this is making it even harder for their families to buy food to put on the table so that they do not go to school hungry. That is shameless. It is shameful, but the Liberals feel no shame for that at all. In fact, I have heard Liberal after Liberal get up in the House and tout the budget as being generational. We all know the only thing the budget is doing is indebting our children. The Liberals are right: It is generational in the sense that it is adding generational debt to our children moving forward. Speaking of children, let us talk about youth. Youth unemployment is hovering around 20% in the greater Toronto area. Why is it hovering at that level? In large part, it is because of the actions of the Liberal government over the last 10 years.”
“Speaking of struggling to make ends meet, members may have heard us say in this House repeatedly that food banks have told us a record 2.2 million Canadians are now visiting food banks on a daily basis, with one-third being children. That is over 700,000 children a month. In fact, to put things into perspective, today, while the Liberals are here asking for a free credit card, a free line of credit on money they have already spent seven-twelfths of, 24,000 hungry children will walk into a food bank hoping to find an item they can consume, because they are hungry. I say shame on the Liberals and shame on the government for not considering the impact of its actions with the budget and continuing to increase costs by imposing such things as the carbon tax and the fuel standard tax on the manufacturers and the people who deliver goods.”
“Liberals will stand and say that this is imaginary and that they are not taxing food. What do they think happens to the manufacturers, the producers and the truckers, who deliver the food that people consume to the grocery store, when they increase the costs by imposing this industrial carbon tax, which is programmed to increase in the budget? What happens is very simple, which is that they will add that cost to the cost of their product. This eventually ends up added to the price of the food items we walk into grocery stores to purchase. In effect, the Liberals are raising food costs at a time when people are struggling to make ends meet.”
“They walk into the grocery store, and the prices keep going up. I have met seniors and young people who are saying they have to eat less. I have told the story in the House about a lady in my riding, who, when I knocked on her door during the election, said, “Sir, I'm not into politics, but I'm on a fixed income and I have to eat less because the prices are so high and I want to keep living in my home.” (1650) I was looking in the budget for some kind of relief for our seniors, but what did I find? I found the words “industrial carbon” tax. The industrial carbon tax adds costs to farmers for their equipment and for their manufacturing processes. For trucking companies, this adds cost to the freight. What do the Liberals think happens when they keep adding these costs?”
“Today, Canadians walking into an emergency department of a hospital have to wait hours and hours to get service, and when they get that service, quite often they are put in the hallway of the hospital for days, waiting for service. However, the government has nothing in the budget that increases any previous commitment on health care. Nevertheless, there is a lot in the budget that will increase the cost of interest that Canadians will pay. Everybody in the House, as well as all Canadians, knows that the government has no source of income other than the Canadian taxpayer. Who is going to pay for all of this? Hard-working Canadians are going to pay for the bill that they keep adding and adding to. It is a staggering number: $60 billion in interest alone. Canadians are struggling to make ends meet.”
“Every Canadian family and every Canadian business knows that if we spend more than we take in, it is a formula for bankruptcy. It never bodes well. However, it gets worse; it gets a lot worse. Over the next five years, a staggering $324 billion will be added to our national debt, which is on top of the roughly $1.4 trillion Canada is still in debt for today. Here is the problem with that: When we borrow money, we have to pay interest on that money. This year, lo and behold, the Liberal government opposite with a so-called economist brainiac Prime Minister is offering Canadians a staggering debt of almost $60 billion in interest payments, which is more than we spend on health care in this country.”
“If they did, they would have presented the budget when they were elected, not wait seven months, take the summer off, go on vacation, perhaps do a little bit of golfing, travel to Europe and come back. They did not even present in September or October. On November 4, they said, “Here's a budget, and we've already spent seven months of it. If you guys don't vote for it, oops, you may want an election.” Well, I have news for them: Canadians are not buying it. No matter how many times the finance minister stands up in the House and says that he has good news for Canadians, Canadians know that with the government, it is nothing but bad news; we know that for sure. This year, the budget is calling for an $80-billion deficit, which is spending $80 billion more than we take in.”
“The budget calls for $586 billion in spending, which is the most expensive, as I said, in Canadian history outside the pandemic, but here is the thing: Seven months have already transpired; seven months of what is in the budget has already been spent. Using simple division, with seven of the 12 months, the Liberals have already spent $343 billion. Now the Liberals have brought this 406-page omnibus budget bill into Parliament, saying, “Hey, here's what we're going to do. Vote with us.” They do not care about what our vote is going to be. They have no respect for Parliament or the process of this place. They do not care for the house of democracy. They do not care to listen to debate.”
“Madam Speaker, I will be splitting my time with my colleague, the member for Chatham-Kent—Leamington . I am pleased to rise today to speak to the budget. For months in the House, we have heard from the Liberals, one after another, telling us that we were going to be presented with a generational, if not transformative, budget for this year, 2025. Of course, we were waiting with bated breath to listen to the budget, which is not fooling anybody. This is not a budget; a budget is done before the money is spent. However, the current budget is the most expensive in Canadian history outside the pandemic. The fiscal year, as Canadians know, begins April 1 for the Government of Canada.”
“Can the member please expand on why his government did not look at the industrial carbon tax seriously and did not provide help for the children and the 2.2 million Canadians walking into food banks hungry today?”
“Madam Speaker, I listened carefully to the member's speech, and he talked about families and this somehow being a transformational budget, which of course is far from being so. Today, sadly, 24,000 children will walk into food banks in this country hungry. The government had an opportunity here to do something about the industrial carbon tax, which adds costs to farmers on their equipment and their manufacturing processes. They get passed down onto the food prices people face when they walk into a grocery store. It is a question of affordability. Families cannot afford to eat, including the over 700,000 children who are walking into food banks hoping for some food today, children who are hungry.”
“Madam Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for that thorough speech. It certainly was very informative. I would like to ask the member the following question, given the youth unemployment crisis and the health care crisis we have in this country, among a bunch of other things. We see an additional $324 billion added to the national debt over the next five years and being passed on to future generations. I wonder if the member can share with us the thoughts of some of her constituents, and how she feels, about passing on this debt for future generations to pay at a time when this budget is calling for us to pay more money in interest payments to banks than we are putting into health care, of all things.”
“Mr. Speaker, we are going to be voting against adding an additional $300 billion in debt for our future generations. Food professor Sylvain Charlebois said the food wholesale prices have increased in Canada versus the U.S. and that the one factor driving this is the industrial carbon tax. He also said that he is deeply concerned and expects that food inflation will continue to be a problem moving forward. Experts are warning that food prices will continue to skyrocket. I will ask this again: Why is the Prime Minister increasing the industrial carbon tax and making food more expensive for all Canadians?”
“Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister 's costly budget is full of broken promises and is the most expensive in Canadian history. It has the largest deficit in history outside of COVID. It will drive up the cost of food, housing and everything else that Canadians buy. The Liberals had a chance to lower food costs for Canadians, but they chose to make food more expensive by increasing the industrial carbon tax, driving up the cost of fertilizer and farm equipment. Why is the Prime Minister increasing the industrial carbon tax and making food more expensive for Canadians?”
“Madam Speaker, I do not know if the member opposite has had an opportunity to read the amendments, but clearly this issue was addressed at committee. The Conservatives put forth some very meaningful amendments that would have addressed the case she mentioned of the constituent in her riding. Unfortunately, she and the rest of her colleagues in the Liberal Party voted those amendments down.”
“Madam Speaker, the Liberals continue to disrespect other parliamentarians. That is very clear. They rejected all of the committee's recommendations and they are not respecting the democratic process. I agree with what my colleague said in her question.”
“Madam Speaker, I have a lot of respect for you and this House. The Liberals cannot say one thing one day and say something different the next day. They cannot inhale and exhale at the same time. I hope those words are more appropriate. Some hon. members: Oh, oh!”
“Madam Speaker, I will attempt to address the ridiculous question from the member opposite. She and other members of the Liberal Party have stood up on the bill and on other bills and said to us, before the amendments were presented in the House, to take it to committee and to come back with recommendations and amendments. Of course, we did that. We came back, but the Liberals voted down the amendments. I have something to say to the Liberals: As hard as they try, and as eloquent as they are in their speeches in the House, there is one thing they have not mastered yet. They have not mastered how to suck and blow at the same time.”
“It has been half a year since the out-of-touch Prime Minister was elected; he still does not have a constituency office to serve his riding, so he would not know what we are dealing with every day in our constituency offices. If the Prime Minister cannot figure out how to serve his own constituents, how can we expect him to serve the country? The Prime Minister's priorities are everywhere else but here.”
“Do the members opposite realize that their voting down these amendments tells me and all Canadians that Liberals do not care if Canadians can speak English or French? It tells me and all Canadians that Liberals do not care if they can execute their immigration policies. It also tells me and all Canadians that Liberals do not care if new Canadians with criminal background records are being released into our communities. I will end with this: I am not surprised that the Liberal government is putting forward more legislation that would add to the chaos in our immigration system. We know that the immigration system is a train wreck, because each of our constituency offices is inundated with immigration files, every office except, of course, the Prime Minister 's.”
“The Liberal government does not care about recommendations. It does not care about what other parliamentarians have to say. It has no respect for amendments or recommendations coming out of the standing committees of Parliament. Our immigration system is an unmitigated disaster right now. Multiple parties took part in the legislative process, proposing amendments to make a lousy piece of Liberal legislation better. What do the Liberals do? They vote down amendments, not only on the bill before us but on pretty much every bill that comes into the House. I have news for the members opposite: Canadians elected them, just as much as they did us, to come to Ottawa. In fact, 174 members of the 343-member House are not Liberal. That may be a surprise to the members opposite, who are behaving as if they had a huge majority in the government.”
“The proposed amendment would have changed this to three years within a five-year period, consistent with how our immigration system works now. How is an immigration officer supposed to verify three years of physical presence over the course of someone's life, using records that are decades-old or that, in many cases, may not even exist? I have something to get off my chest. At the immigration committee last week, the immigration minister , the seventh Liberal one in the last 10 years, was questioned on a different bill. When I started mentioning to her the potential improvements, she said that suggestions and helpful comments are very much appreciated, and she went on to say that the committee is there to give recommendations. How the process on Bill C-3 has played out is emblematic of the last 10 years of the Liberal government.”
“It is hard to integrate into a new country already knowing the language, let alone not knowing the language, which is certainly setting immigrants up to fail. Even the minister said that our official languages were part of Canadian values. If they are Canadian values, as the minister suggested, why did the Liberals vote against putting them in the bill? Why did the minister, who believes that, not put the requirement in the bill in the first place? Liberals also voted against harmonizing the residency requirements that someone needs to fulfill in order to obtain citizenship through naturalisation with those for citizenship by descent. Providing proof of three years of residency over the entirety of someone's life would cause huge administrative problems.”
“I am going to summarize what happened. The committee studied the bill. Conservatives worked together with our Bloc colleagues to pass reasonable amendments, such as new Canadians' being required to know one of our two official languages and to have a criminal background check to protect the safety of Canadians. There were a lot of other important points. The Liberals then came to the House and voted down all the amendments. What were the amendments? Liberals voted against new Canadians' having a criminal background check. Residents in my riding do not want people with criminal records immigrating to Canada and walking our streets. (1245) Liberals voted against new Canadians' knowing a little bit of either the English or the French language.”
“As I have previously mentioned in speeches with respect to the bill, Liberals will say that they have to pass the legislation because of a lower-court ruling that said that the first-generation limit of citizenship by descent could go on indefinitely. What the Liberals fail to mention is not only that they did not appeal the court ruling but also that they have control over how it is implemented, through the legislation they put forward, as a minority government. The legislation before us today does not include the common-sense amendments passed at committee, as we have heard all morning. Those amendments would have turned a lousy Liberal bill into a slightly less lousy Liberal bill. Yesterday felt a bit like déjà vu: Liberals once again were joined by their coalition partner, the NDP, to vote down our common-sense amendments.”
“That is the situation our youth find themselves in after 10 years of disastrous Liberal immigration policies, when a mind-boggling number of temporary foreign workers and international students were let into the country. When the Prime Minister says we need to make sacrifices, what he really means is that both new immigrants and Canadians must suffer because of 10 years of Liberal failed policies. With all that in mind, forgive me if I am a bit skeptical about the Liberal migration bill before us, as it promises to potentially add thousands of new Canadians into an already overburdened system and would do nothing to address the challenges we already have.”
“People are waiting months to see a specialist for basic diagnostic services. Longer wait times mean that everyone's health suffers. Right now there is also a huge job crisis. In the greater Toronto area alone, youth unemployment is hovering dangerously close to the 20% mark. The importance of a first job in high school or when coming out of higher education cannot be overstated for our youth wanting to start their adult life. A first job for youth builds critical skills and kick-starts a career. Without the ability to get a job, especially a first job coming out of higher education, long-term earnings are impacted, careers are stalled and a sense of hopelessness kicks in.”
“A father told me that his son is working full-time but cannot afford a place to rent and is stuck in the basement. Many of my colleagues on this side of the aisle, and I am sure on the other side of the aisle as well, are hearing the same stories across our entire country. At the health committee, witnesses noted that if immigration levels continue to be mismatched with provincial health care delivery, outcomes for all Canadians will suffer. Canadians are already suffering. The Liberals' not considering health care capacity in their immigration policies has meant longer wait times for both immigrants and Canadians. People are waiting upwards of eight hours in hospital emergency rooms, and when they are admitted, they are in the hallway for hours and hours, if not days.”
“Madam Speaker, Bill C-3 is once again before us. The Liberals have dismantled our immigration system and turned it into a circus. They have thrown open our borders, inviting in millions of people over the last decade without the necessary housing, health care or jobs to support them. Let us look at the results. Housing prices have shot up to unattainable levels. We were already in a housing deficit before increasing our population. Adding millions of new people to a housing market that was already undersupplied created an environment that resulted in skyrocketing rents and out-of-reach home prices. Just last week in my riding, a mother told me that her daughter wanted to start a family but could not because they could not afford to buy a home.”
“Mr. Speaker, the safety of our fellow citizens must always be a priority for us all. I have a simple question. Can my colleague explain why she thinks the Liberals opposed criminal background checks for people coming into Canada under this bill?”
“Mr. Speaker, I want to address the issue of doing a background check, of really doing a criminal check to ensure the people coming into the country are people who are going to be safe walking around our communities, our schools, our malls or anywhere down the streets near our homes. I really fail to see why the Liberal government does not understand the importance of doing these criminal checks. Under the bill, someone could be born outside the country to someone who was here 30 years ago, have never lived a minute in this country, have never contributed a penny to this country, and expect to come to the country as a full Canadian citizen without giving our country the right to do a background check as to their criminality. The member opposite in the Liberal party mentioned her family.”