Ruby Sahota
Brampton North—Caledon, Ontario · Liberal · Canada
“Mr. Speaker, on the day of his funeral, I ask all members to join me in honouring OPP Constable Tarun Bali, who made the ultimate sacrifice in the line of duty, and in extending our heartfelt condolences to his loved ones and fellow officers.”
“Mr. Speaker, Canadians have questions, victims have questions and the police chiefs have questions as to why it has taken so long for Bill C-22 , which was originally Bill C-2 , to get through the legislative process. Every day that we wait, more and more victims are created in Canada.”
“Mr. Speaker, where are the Conservatives who used to care about protecting Canadians? They are not in this House. It is the government that has committed to protecting Canadians through our various bills that we have progressed through this House.”
“Madam Speaker, throughout the debate, I have heard the Conservatives make reference to, “Why do we need this bill at all? We already have existing laws.” It is really surprising to me, hearing that come from the Conservatives, considering they claim to be tough on crime and want longer sentences.”
“Mr. Speaker, this Conservative opposition is not about scrutinizing bills. We are up for scrutiny. We have amended many of our bills, including Bill C-22 .”
“Mr. Speaker, the member talks about underlying crimes that are in the code already, such as assault or mischief. This bill would take the penalties for those crimes and double them for people who would dare prevent somebody from going into their synagogue.”
The complete record
Every one of 448 lines we hold for Ruby Sahota, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 5 of 9.
“Mr. Speaker, I think I would give precedence and priority to legislation, and committees do too. Committees give priority to legislative work. The example I have been giving is that there are two very important and urgent pieces of legislation at the justice committee that need to be passed in order to change the Criminal Code. There are up to 80 different changes in one piece, the bail and sentencing piece, of the Criminal Code of Canada. It would make sentences harder for criminals and getting bail a lot tougher. That is really important. Canadians have been asking for that. In the face of rising hate, they have also been asking for us to act on that issue. Let us give legislation the priority it deserves and pass those pieces.”
“I encourage all the members of the justice committee to meet and to sort these issues out, to pass Bill C-9 and pass Bill C-14 . Also, at the the public safety committee, let us bring back Bill C-2 . Let us bring back the provisions that were left behind by the Conservatives: lawful access provisions and being able to fill the gap of vulnerability we have through our mailing system right now. As it stands, even with a judicial warrant, we cannot search mail for fentanyl and—”
“I think Canadians do not appreciate that. Canadians are being extorted. I was at a town hall this weekend. People asked me, “What is going on in Parliament? Why can't you get this done, when it's so important to us to be able to get the laws in place that would help give harsher penalties to criminals and make bail harder for them to get? What do the Conservatives have against that?” I am just flabbergasted. I am really shocked that those are measures the Conservatives are, all of a sudden, not supporting any more. I feel like things have been flipped upside down a bit. I do not know what's going on, but it is confusing. I just ask that we work more productively together. It is great that the justice committee is going to be meeting.”
“Mr. Speaker, I cited an example of a time when the Conservative leader went to an event. At that event, he said that Bill C-9 , currently, in the form that it is right now, would criminalize religions in this country. That is misleading. That is misinformation that is spreading online. It is, obviously, causing concern. I would be concerned too, if that was the truth. It is our job as parliamentarians to set the record straight, to be responsible, to debate bills on their merits, on the facts of what is in a bill, and if a motion is put forward, then to debate that motion on its merits. We can also, of course, vote against those types of motions. Instead, what is happening is that a lot of fear is being spread into our communities, and then bills are being held up based on that narrative, which is irresponsible.”
“They heard from 23 witnesses, which should have been 33, but the Conservatives filibustered. Now they are saying the work is not done and we should let them take a fancy tour across the country, pack it all up, spend and waste taxpayer dollars to go and continue to spread disinformation across the country. We have done it before in the House, where all parliamentarians from all sides have gotten together to do what is right, to work in the best interests of Canadians, not in the best interests of themselves or their fundraising campaigns. Let us pass these crucial bills, these urgent bills that victims are calling for and police are calling for. That is why this work is so important. It is actually life or death right now. I would plead with the Conservatives to help us pass this—”
“(1715) We presented this legislation, we have debated it in the House, but all we have seen from the Conservatives are stall tactics and misleading information being spread to Canadians about how the government is going to go after their data. That is absolutely false. That is not true. There is no interest in going after anyone's data. However, it is important for police to be able to narrow down the suspects they have, to rule out suspects they have in cases, so that they can act quickly and so criminals do not go on to commit other crimes. This is the important work that is being held up in the justice committee. Like I said, for Bill C-9 , there has been three hours and 30 minutes of debate in the House already, and eight hours in the committee that could have been 11, but the Conservatives filibustered.”
“Our Five Eyes allies all have these types of modern tools, but the Conservatives will not allow us to be able to give that to our police agencies. I think they are listening to an extreme base that they have right now and bending to its wishes. Another pattern I have seen is really interesting, because the Conservatives used to be pro-police. However, we have heard the Conservative leader calling the RCMP “despicable” and then the co-deputy leader getting up in the House and saying enforcement is the problem in this country. Meanwhile, our law enforcement officers have been working incredibly hard, giving us the proper recommendations we need so we can put them into our legislation.”
“The powers in lawful access would help provide police the powers and the tools they need to catch extortionists, things the Conservatives bring up in the House every single day. They complain about a problem, but they do not want a solution. Also, it would help catch pedophiles. Right now, even if the police know the IP addresses all across the country where people are downloading child pornography, they are unable to act on that information quickly because they need to go through procedural court orders, which takes a very long time. In many of these extortion cases, we are seeing the criminals go free and commit more and more extortions. Child predators are continuing their work because it takes up to six months at times to get judicial authorization. It is so important to give these modern tools to police.”
“One thing we have seen that is very clear is that the Conservatives definitely will not allow the police more of the investigative powers they have been asking for so they can actually catch extortionists and pedophiles. The second bill we tabled in this House was Bill C-2 , the stronger borders act. In that piece of legislation, we had a lawful access regime, which is something that, once upon a time, the Conservatives agreed with. However, all of a sudden, once again it is their way to fundraise and rage farm. Clickbait and rage farming is the stuff the Conservatives are famous for doing. Some hon. members: Oh, oh! Hon. Ruby Sahota: The Conservatives are angry, Mr. Speaker, because of the tactics I am pointing at and the clear pattern we have been seeing.”
“One day they are asking for changes in the law, and the next day their deputy leader is getting up in the House and saying we do not have a law problem; it is an enforcement problem. If that was the case, then why are they asking for all these law changes? There are changes that are necessary. We have implemented them in legislation. However, the pattern we are seeing is that the Conservatives are opposing all those changes. Therefore, they are blocking bail reform. People are being released today because of the Conservatives' failure to work with the government. They are blocking protections for peaceful protesters and peaceful worshippers.”
“Every time they get up in question period to talk about crime, they ask for Criminal Code changes. We are doing all of the things the Conservatives have asked for, all the things that law enforcement, the communities and victims have asked for, and all of of a sudden, we are seeing this pattern. The Conservatives are trying to stop us and obstruct us from doing the work that is necessary. The pattern we have been seeing is a very clear one. What we have been seeing is that the Conservatives are incredibly weak on crime this Parliament, and they are blocking bail reform. The proof is in their actions, and not in what they get up and say, because we cannot trust what they are going to say.”
“I will say that when the issue was Bill C-9, she stood up in the House and said, “We do not have a law problem in this country. We have an enforcement problem”. (1710) I am wondering, is the deputy leader saying the police do not know what they are doing? What we have heard from police agencies across this country is that hate crime charges have not been laid. What we have heard from Jewish communities across this country is that they are not seeing the law being applied, due to the lack of clarity that had existed, and so consultations had been done to create this legislation so communities could be better protected through our code. Every time the Conservatives get up in the House, they want Criminal Code changes. All their private members' bills ask for Criminal Code changes.”
“We were left with eight hours. In terms of the number of witnesses, the committee saw 23 witnesses on this hate crime legislation, but it should have seen 33 had the Conservatives not started filibustering the committee. It is quite clear that it is the Conservatives who do not want to hear from witnesses and experts who come to give their testimony as to the pros and cons of different aspects of the legislation, which is really important in a democracy. It is the work that committees are given to do, and it is incredibly important. What shocks me is that the other day in this House, the co- deputy leader of the Conservative Party stood up, and she was referring to Bill C-9 . Maybe she was referring to all Criminal Code changes; I do not know.”
“Like I said, after weeks of filibusters, procedural games and attempts to drag us backwards, the Conservatives have now moved two motions at committee to stop clause by clause and to send the committee on a national tour. This is after the bill has already been debated. Witnesses have come before committee, and I can let members know how many witnesses; I have a list right here. The work the committee was able to do has been impressive, but I just wish it was given the opportunity to continue this work to completion. Instead, the Conservatives are holding up two very important bills in that committee. The committee had eight hours of time on this bill. It should have been 11 hours, in terms of the time that was scheduled, but due to the Conservative filibustering, those hours were not allowed for committee work.”
“All confidential amendments had already been submitted on November 24, and the Bloc amendment was scheduled to be introduced that day, but the filibuster prevented that from happening. In fact, the amendment was never debated at all, and so no consideration was given to that matter. In the meantime, what the Conservatives have been busy doing is demonizing this piece of legislation and coming up with what-ifs, hypothetical scenarios that are not even in the bill. The Conservative leader is going to events and telling people they will not be able to read the Torah, the Quran or the Bible without being charged. These are complete falsehoods. It is not true. These are hypothetical scenarios that have been created, and I would argue that even with potential amendments, that would not be the case. Once again, it is all rage bait.”
“There is a lot of conversation happening right now as to whether the Liberals agree with the Bloc amendment its members were going to be putting forward, but that amendment was not even put forward and was not moved at committee. However, somebody leaked that information, which is a serious matter of procedure and a failure of the member who made that leak. It is important to give committee members the opportunity in committee to debate these issues and come up with a sincere decision on those issues, but what we saw were complete delay tactics. For example, on Thursday, November 27, the committee's work was completely derailed when the Conservative member for Elgin—St. Thomas—London South filibustered for two hours.”
“That is why I would say that the Conservatives are absolutely not serious, not genuinely serious, about public safety. They are certainly not serious about listening to the people who are most affected by crime. (1705) Communities across Canada have been calling for stronger protections in the face of rising hate and rising anti-Semitism. We had many community associations call upon the House to make changes in legislation, to make changes to the Criminal Code of Canada, and we are doing exactly that. Every Conservative delay means that those protections are also delayed in getting to Canadians. The proposed combatting hate act could not be reviewed at the committee, and the amendments that were put forward were not considered.”
“In fact, I would argue that what they are doing is trying to make sure that the government is not able to accomplish its agenda and pass these reforms and pieces of legislation, so that Canadians would be upset, so that these community groups would be upset, and so that the Conservatives can continue with the rage bait that they do online. What would they do if we were to solve all of these problems with our legislation? What rage bait would they be able to carry on about at that point? We have seen, in fact, that every time there is some type of impasse, the Conservative Party of Canada gets online and raises money at the expense of the serious issues that affect Canadians and the incidents that victims suffer from. They have no qualms or feelings about fundraising off those issues.”
“Under the Conservative leader , what we have seen is that the Conservatives would rather stage political theatre on the taxpayer's dime than do the job that Canadians have sent them here to do as an official opposition. They are not serious about public safety. They are not serious about governing, that is for sure. Hopefully, they are not given the opportunity one day, because they are showing clearly where their interests lie. It is in gaining political power and not in what the opposition is sent here to do, which is to make constructive amendments, to make our legislation stronger and to make Canadians safer. That is exactly what they have not been doing.”
“Instead of hijacking the meetings and accomplishing nothing, it is better, at times, to pause. The committee chair in the House had also explained why that pause was needed: to gather parties together and come to a path forward so that we could work together more productively. I would like to point out that in the justice committee, two major public safety bills, the combatting hate act and the bail and sentencing reform act, are both being stalled, even as provinces and territories, municipalities, police chiefs, police associations and victims groups have been pleading with parliamentarians for swift action. Blocking these reforms is really irresponsible. It is an affront to the public safety of Canadians.”
“After weeks of blocking work that would have made our communities safer, the Conservatives were demanding that the justice committee pack up and hit the road to embark on an expensive, credit-card budget, cross-country tour with a fully staffed entourage that would burn through taxpayer dollars while accomplishing absolutely none of the urgent work that Canadians are expecting of our government right now. Conservatives moved two motions to paralyze the justice committee. It was nothing but bad-faith obstruction. We were not going to let them hijack another committee meeting and that is why, when a new chair was appointed to that committee, he had to cancel one meeting in order to sort things out. For the previous several meetings, all that had happened was obstruction. I will give exact examples of how that was done.”
“Mr. Speaker, this is an interesting conversation we are having. I think the Conservatives are attempting to try to turn the tables, since I think that the message is getting out to Canadians that there have been delay tactics by the Conservatives to obstruct and stall legislation for some time in many committees. We have been talking about that for some time, so it is good that they are upset about some committees being cancelled this week. I would argue that this was due to the obstruction that the Conservatives have been leading for weeks and weeks. I will give us an example.”
“Mr. Speaker, Canadians have been clear that they want stronger protections in the face of rising hate and that they want meaningful bail reform. After weeks of Conservative delay tactics and stalling in committee, I am really happy to see that they might move forward on the combatting hate crime legislation on Thursday. However, when it comes to bail reform, the Conservatives are complete hypocrites. Our bail reform legislation would make sentences harsher for criminals, and it would end bail for serious and repeat offenders, but of course the Conservatives do not want that to pass, because then what would they use for their clickbait to—”
“Mr. Speaker, do members know who is paying the price for these Conservative games? It is Canadians. While victims' groups and frontline police officers are asking for us to act urgently and respond to the crisis, the Conservatives are spending their time filibustering with nonsense speeches about cats and dogs. Members heard that right: cats and dogs. These are procedural stunts that they are playing in order to stop these bills from passing through committee. They are obstructing the committee from doing its job. When it comes to public safety, the Conservatives have a lot of bark, but no bite. They are standing in the way—”
“Mr. Speaker, there are provisions in place that say if a non-citizen commits a crime and serves a sentence, they are removed from Canada. CBSA works on these cases, and it prioritizes criminal cases when making removals.”
“Mr. Speaker, first of all, the Liberals did not block any kind of debate, as the member is well aware. The Speaker made that ruling yesterday. Second, the best thing to stop extortion is deterrence. If criminals knew they would be caught, they would not be involved in such crimes. One way to deter criminals is to make sure we give police officers the tools they need to be able to catch them. We have brought lawful access measures in Bill C-2 in the House. Guess who is blocking them? The Conservatives are. They will not allow the police to have the tools needed to catch these criminals.”
“Mr. Speaker, what is the Conservative plan? We heard it in the House earlier today; it is to stall our legislation. We brought Bill C-2 . We brought Bill C-12 and Bill C-14 , all measures that would help with these types of crimes. The legislation would give tougher sentences. It would make it harder for offenders to get bail. However, the Conservatives do not want to support real solutions; they just want to delay, they want to cut and they want to fundraise for their own personal means.”
“Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives have no plan. If they had a plan, they would support Bill C-14 . In Bill C-14 we would make sentencing for extortionists consecutive. It would also make it harder for extortionists to get bail. That is why it is so important that the Conservatives support these measures and support Bill C-2 . I think they do not support them because that would mess up their fundraising plans.”
“Mr. Speaker, we take extortion very seriously in Canada. Extortion with a firearm carries a maximum sentence of life in prison. Extortionists think they are not going to get caught. Do members know why that is? It is because we have not given law enforcement the tools they need to catch extortionists. Those tools are in our Bill C-2 , but Conservatives do not agree with the bill and will not give our police lawful access tools in order to catch extortionists, so they know they are going to get away with it.”
“Mr. Speaker, that is absolutely false. We are taking these crimes very seriously. In fact, that is why the second bill we presented in this House was Bill C-2 , which would give law enforcement lawful access tools to be able to catch pedophiles, catch child predators online and catch extortionists. The Conservative Party of Canada had those tools removed and put into another bill. Why is the Conservative Party of Canada failing to be the partner it ought to be in Parliament when it comes to public safety?”
“Mr. Speaker, the member talked about violent crime, as well as the retail crime that happened at a jeweller's. Bill C-14 would address these exact issues so that these types of criminals who are committing organized retail crime do not get back out on the streets. It would also address home invasions, auto theft and violent crime. It would do many things. There are 80 different changes to the Criminal Code in Bill C-14. I would like to know what is holding up the Conservative Party. Why can we not get this bill to committee and get it passed as soon as possible?”
“Mr. Speaker, in this country, extortion is taken very seriously. When extortion is committed, someone could serve life in prison according to the sentence in the Criminal Code of Canada. What is really important when it comes to the extortion crisis is solving extortion before charges are laid. Police across this country are asking for lawful access provisions so they can investigate these cases appropriately. Who is against that? It is the Conservatives. Why will they not give law enforcement the tools they need to crack down on extortions?”
“Mr. Speaker, I have good news. The Conservatives have a chance, in this Parliament, to vote for Bill C-2 , to vote for Bill C-14 and to vote for Bill C-12 . This weekend, I spoke to an extortion victim. They told me that it has taken the police months to get permission from the courts to link the phone number they are being extorted from to an actual suspect. Lawful access, which is in Bill C-2 , would help provide the solution to this problem. When will the Conservatives get on board and vote for lawful access measures?”
“Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has taken many steps to improve the situation of public safety in our country. When the Conservatives vote against budget 2025, they are voting against more RCMP officers and more CBSA officers. They are voting against a $1.7-billion investment in our RCMP. They are voting against pay raises for RCMP cadets. Essentially, they are voting against public safety.”
“Mr. Speaker, as I have said before, child predators are the worst criminals in our country, and they should face the toughest sentences. That is exactly why we are bringing forward new legislation to toughen sentences and make sure child predators stay behind bars. I would like the Conservatives to promise that they will support that piece of legislation and Bill C-19 , which is currently before this House, because they have not supported us in the past when it comes to helping and protecting children. Please put your politics aside and support the children of this country.”
“Mr. Speaker, plain and simple, child abusers should face the toughest penalties under Canadian law. We are bringing forward legislation that would protect children. I hope the Conservatives can support it. Their past record is that they have not supported the online harms legislation and have not supported lawful access tools for law enforcement so we can catch child predators. They put politics before the safety of our children.”
“Mr. Speaker, the member has risen in the House many times to address public safety concerns, and I know that his constituents in Brampton have those concerns, because they are my constituents too. In this budget, there are historic investments. There is $1.7 billion to the RCMP. We are deploying a thousand new officers and a thousand new CBSA agents. The Conservatives said they are not going to support it, but that does not surprise me, since their leader thinks the RCMP is despicable.”
“Mr. Speaker, I have been speaking to lots of families that have been victims of crimes, and many have been asking for online harms legislation. We brought legislation like that in the House, but the member was active in voting against it and made sure it did not pass in the House. Law enforcement is also asking for tools to catch predators, but the Conservatives are against this. Why are the Conservatives so concerned about the privacy rights of criminals instead of protecting our children?”
“Mr. Speaker, we are going to be bringing forward legislation that would address this particular issue, but I would like to ask why the Conservatives have been against every measure we have put forward to protect our children? We brought online harms legislation; they voted against it. We brought lawful access tools for law enforcement; they are against it. Why are the Conservatives protecting child abusers?”
“Mr. Speaker, we are all about protecting the rights of children. That is why we want to give law enforcement the tools that are needed to catch predators online. We brought forward tougher sentences for child offenders. Child abusers should be put behind bars, and that is exactly where we intend to keep them, through Bill C-14 and the new legislation that we are going to be tabling in the House this fall.”
“Mr. Speaker, child abusers are among the most reprehensible people in our society. That is why we have taken many measures like Bill C-63 , Bill C-14 and the lawful access provision so they can be caught in the first place. We are also going to be bringing forward new—”
“Mr. Speaker, we have been taking action on the issue since day one. We introduced legislation, Bill C-63 , with respect to sexual offences online, but the Conservatives did not support it. We brought the lawful access provision so that pedophiles could be caught, but the Conservatives did not support it. Some hon. members: Oh, oh!”
“Mr. Speaker, the rights of victims are very important to the government. That is why we have been taking action. Let me make it very plain and simple for the Conservatives: Child abusers should face the toughest penalties under Canadian law. That is why we introduced Bill C-14 . We are making sweeping reforms that would make bail stricter, that would make sentences tougher and that would make sure child abusers stay behind bars. We also introduced the lawful access provision so we can catch child predators and give law enforcement agencies the tools that are needed, but the Conservatives are against it.”
“Mr. Speaker, through actions, we are standing up for victims of crime. It is plain and simple: Child abusers should face the toughest penalties under Canadian law. That is why we introduced the— Some hon. members: Oh, oh!”
“Mr. Speaker, we are not silent on this issue. That is why we introduced sweeping reforms under Bill C-14 to make bail stricter and sentences tougher. We are making sure that child sexual offenders serve time behind bars, but let us not forget the conduct of the Conservatives. They refused to support Bill C-63 , which would have helped protect our children against online crime and online predators, and a few months ago, they refused to support lawful access to help police catch pedophiles.”
“Mr. Speaker, plain and simple, child abusers should face the toughest penalties under Canadian law. Child abusers are among the most reprehensible in our society. That is why we have introduced sweeping reforms, through Bill C-14 , that would make bail stricter and sentences tougher and would make child sexual offenders serve time behind bars. However, let us not forget Bill C-63 . A Liberal government introduced that bill to protect kids online, but the Conservatives refused to support it, and a few months ago—”
“Mr. Speaker, as has been mentioned in the House several times today, the principle of restraint was not created in Bill C-75 . It was ruled on in a Supreme Court decision, in the Antic decision in 2017, although the principle of restraint is something that was applied in courtrooms far before that as well. I would like to ask the member about the feedback she is getting from her community on Bill C-14 and all the measures that are contained in it.”
“Mr. Speaker, in his speech, the member mentioned that the principle of restraint existed long before Bill C-75 and that it is still within our common law as a Supreme Court decision. That is a very important note, because there has been a lot of misunderstanding of the issue. I would like the member to clarify and get into that a little more, because the opposition Conservatives have announced that they would use the notwithstanding clause to get around the Supreme Court decision.”
“Mr. Speaker, the member raised a very important point about data. I heard about that quite a bit this summer. Just the other day, a Conservative member was yelling out at me, asking how many people have been released on bail this year. I said we do not know, because that is not information the federal government has, nor do we know what types of crimes those people who end up being released more often have committed. Several times we have asked the premiers of the provinces to provide this information so we can make the best informed decisions for public safety in our country. I would like to hear more from the member about how data could provide us with better informed decision-making at the federal level.”
“Madam Speaker, the latter principle is addressed in the bill, and it would not apply to reverse onus cases. The member made an interesting comment about young offenders. He said that, when they are incarcerated for a period of a year or so, they come out as even more hardened criminals. I thought that was an interesting observation that he highlighted. For this bill, we consulted with a lot of stakeholders and experts in this area, and we are trying to get the balance right. I would like to ask the member if he thinks that serving a sentence makes young people become even more hardened criminals. What would be a solution that is appropriate to make sure our young people can live a good, successful life and get out of a life of crime?”