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 7 of 9.
“Mr. Speaker, it sounds like the Leader of the Opposition is against a comprehensive plan coming forward. It takes time to put a plan together, and we have done exactly that in the new reform legislation, which would deal with not only bail but also sentencing. The Leader of the Opposition likes to mock and call people incompetent when they do not exactly agree with him, but does he agree that we need comprehensive reform, that we should also be dealing with sentencing, that we should also be working with provinces to make sure their courts are implementing bail appropriately and their judges are trained? Would he not admit that comprehensive reform is what we really need?”
“Mr. Speaker, many things the member referenced are going to be in the comprehensive bail reform legislation the government will be putting out. It will be much more comprehensive and in depth than the private member's bill the motion mentions today. Beyond that, in order for someone to reach a bail hearing or sentencing hearing, they have to be caught and charged. Bill C-2 has provisions that would allow police to apprehend and charge extortionists by allowing police to receive subscriber information such as telephone numbers and IP addresses. This is essential to protecting our children from cybercrime and threats, and protecting our seniors, who are facing this issue, from extortionists. I hope the member will support that bill. Will she or will she not?”
“Mr. Speaker, it is incredibly important. I agree with my colleague that every effort should be made, whether it is to help victims of violence or those who are vulnerable because of their upbringing and living conditions, and who could be susceptible to getting into a life of crime. We should try to prevent these types of circumstances from happening and learn from the past; otherwise, we will be digging ourselves out of a very deep hole.”
“Mr. Speaker, I was talking about conditional sentence orders. There are certain conditions that could be put in place when there is interest to public safety. However, we found, as I mentioned, that in many intimate partner violence cases, the offender recommits the offence. It is important to have data and statistics, which is why I would like more statistics from the provincial level. For example, we have put reverse onus in place for firearm offences, but we still do not know whether that reverse onus is having an impact on having less bail in those circumstances. Collecting more data on crime statistics and on how the courts are dealing with the Criminal Code would provide us with comprehensive material so we are able to act on and implement proper, comprehensive reforms. Working together is very important.”
“Mr. Speaker, I believe we are aligned on many issues, and that is upsetting the member quite a bit, it seems. We are bringing forward tough laws, and Bill C-2 is a prime example. There would be a lot of tools for law enforcement to crack down on fentanyl and organized crime. I would hope that the Conservatives support Bill C-2 . It has been recommended by police agencies across this country, and I feel that it would be detrimental if we do not give them the tools to lay charges.”
“Mr. Speaker, the member raises a good question. I talked about the root causes of crime, and I consider that to be extremely important. Of course, interactions with law enforcement, systemic discrimination and what brings somebody to become criminalized are all very important factors. This government has invested heavily in housing and mental health with respect to the transfers to the provinces. Once again, this is a shared area of responsibility. The provinces deliver these supports to Canadians, and I think it is very important. Our gangs and guns funding was also key in providing a lot of organizations supports for young people who are at risk of offending. That, I think, is another important—”
“Mr. Speaker, first, the judges that are presiding over the type of criminal cases we are talking about today are provincially appointed judges. Second, I would like to say that the issue of complexity and the length of trials when it comes to the cases the member referred to are things that have to be taken into consideration. I will not be able to talk about what the upcoming bill will have, but I know that is a concern that is shared on this side of the House. The Liberals think it is very important for us to make sure that none of those types of cases are being dismissed or withdrawn, so there should be upcoming provisions to address that issue.”
“Mr. Speaker, even today the tertiary principles, which were mentioned by a colleague on the Conservative side as well, apply when providing bail. Judges and justices of the peace should be considering public safety first and foremost. They should also be considering whether somebody is a flight risk and the confidence the public has in the judicial system. Those are very important basic foundational principles for deriving a decision on bail. Of course, there are other considerations they take into account, but public safety is the first and ought to be foremost. Although I cannot really comment on what happened in that case exactly, and I do not know why the judge would make such a decision, I think it is import to recognize that these decisions are made at the provincial courthouses.”
“However, it seems he has not learned any lessons from that rejection. He continues to act recklessly, prioritizing political posturing over meaningful, evidence-based criminal justice reform. Let us reject slogans and oversimplifications. Slogans such as “jail not bail” may sound tough, but they do not get us any closer to solving the problem. Real solutions require real work. They involve strengthening laws, improving enforcement, investing in data, devoting resources to addressing the root cause of crime and ultimately building a justice system that works for everyone. (1100) Let us embrace real solutions that are evidence-based, collaborative and grounded in the values of fairness and accountability. That is the path forward. That is the commitment of the government. That is what Canadians deserve and expect.”
“It claims that the Liberal government promised to pass criminal justice reform six months ago but has failed to do so. That is strange. Just last week, we introduced Bill C-9 , the combatting hate act, which includes targeted Criminal Code provisions to address hate crimes, which are on the rise. The bill passed second reading yesterday evening on a deferred division and is now heading to committee for further study. Over the summer, the Minister of Justice has been hard at work studying ways to improve our laws by consulting closely with his provincial counterparts, law enforcement, police chiefs and police associations. Meanwhile, the Conservative leader was busy fighting for his own job and then parachuted into Alberta, after being catastrophically rejected by Canadians across the country and in his own former riding of Carleton.”
“They also deserve a justice system that works and that is firm but fair. They also deserve a government that listens, responds and acts, and we will do exactly that. I also want to make mention of the opposition finally showing a shred of common sense, though it is long overdue. In Bill C-242 , which is mentioned in today's motion, the Conservatives quietly removed the reckless American-style, far right, three-strike scheme they ran on in the last election. Empty slogans based on sporting rules will not foster a robust criminal system and keep Canadians safe. Canadians deserve real solutions that are guided by working collaboratively with law enforcement, attorneys and other levels of government. That is exactly what our comprehensive bill would do. I pause here to comment on the way this motion is drafted.”
“The changes I mentioned will help with our immediate issues, but if we are serious about reducing crime and seeing improvements of public safety, we must look beyond our criminal law system as well. Public safety begins with prevention. It requires supporting our youth, investing in communities and addressing the social conditions, including poverty, addiction, mental health and housing. Bail reform is but one piece of the complex puzzle. Lasting change requires a broader commitment to equity, opportunity and support. All orders of government must work together to build an effective justice system that distinguishes between those who pose a genuine risk and those who can be safely managed in the community. People in Canada deserve a justice system that protects them all. They deserve laws that are clear, consistent and effective.”
“I fear, as we continue to make other reforms, that perhaps we may not understand fully whether they are having the impact Parliament intends. Further to that, the provinces administer the bail courts. Earlier this year, Brampton mayor Patrick Brown, on behalf of Ontario's Big City Mayors, wrote a letter to the Province of Ontario sounding the alarm on cases being withdrawn, discharged or dismissed. It was almost over 50% of cases. This is shocking. Highlighting the need for more Crown attorneys to try these cases more quickly, more judges to hear them and more spaces in jails to put criminals away is crucial. Comprehensive criminal justice reform must include all levels of government coming to the table and doing their part. We are ready to do our part and to work with the provinces and territories that are ready to do theirs.”
“Provinces and territories also hold the key to improving our understanding of bail outcomes. Right now, the provinces do not keep the bail data needed to ascertain whether our bail system is failing. Provincial leadership in improving data collection, and reporting is necessary to ensure effective evidence-based law reform at the federal level. It is an issue that I have brought up with every provincial representative I have met. Bail data will be crucial in understanding the fight against the cracks in our bail system. (1055) In my speech so far, I have addressed several areas where reverse onuses have been imposed, such as cases involving firearm-related offences. We have yet to know whether that has had a positive impact or not.”
“I would now like to turn to an aspect of our bail system that often gets overlooked, and that is the matter of shared responsibility between federal and provincial and territorial governments. While federal legislation sets the laws governing bail, the effectiveness of our bail system depends largely on how it is administered. Provinces are responsible for appointing provincial judges and judges who conduct most bail hearings, who are in some provinces are called justices of the peace; overseeing the operation of police services, which are responsible for supervising individuals who are released on bail; and enforcing any conditions of release. Provincial investments in community-based supports and supervision programs to reduce the risk of reoffending at the bail stage are also critical to ensuring that our bail system works as intended.”
“This bill strictly made mention that courts may only impose CSOs when consistent with community safety and sentencing principles. CSOs must remain proportionate to the gravity of the offence and the offender's responsibility, and provide adequate denunciation and deterrent. The government has heard concerns that CSOs have been increasingly used for sexual offences in some lower courts. Even though appellate courts hold that they rarely represent proportionate sentences, our government continues to monitor the impacts of former Bill C-5 and will consider further refinements to ensure community safety and public confidence. As crime evolves, so must our laws. This is why the Minister of Justice will be advancing additional bail and sentencing reforms this fall.”
“Before moving on to what the government has committed to doing, I want to address another area of criminal law that generates significant commentary: conditional sentence orders, or CSOs. A CSO is a sentence that allows an offender to serve a term of imprisonment in the community under certain conditions. They are only available when the sentence is less than two years and when the court determines that it does not pose a risk to public safety or conflict with sentencing principles. CSOs cannot be imposed for offences that involve mandatory minimums, terrorism, criminal organization offences with indictable minimums of 10 years or more, advocating genocide, torture or attempted murder. The current CSO rules stem from former Bill C-5 , which was presented in 2022.”
“That meant that violent offenders with firearms now had to prove they deserve bail, as opposed to the previous process through which the Crown was having to prove why someone should not receive bail. This presented a significant change that reflected the seriousness of this type of offending and the need to ensure that the courts would turn their minds to the unique public safety risks that those charged with this type of offending might present. Former Bill C-48 also strengthened the intimate partner violence reverse onus. The bill expanded the reverse onus to also apply to anyone who had been previously discharged, and not just those convicted, of an offence involving intimate partner violence.”
“(1050) More recently, in 2023, Parliament unanimously enacted former Bill C-48 in response to a new and pressing challenge: growing concerns about repeat violent offending involving firearms and other weapons at the bail stage. The former Bill C-48 amendments were not developed in isolation. They too were the result of extensive collaboration with the provinces and territories. They also responded directly to calls for reform from premiers across the country. Among other changes, former Bill C-75 created a reverse onus at bail to better address the heightened public safety risks posed by those accused of repeat violent offending with firearms and other weapons.”
“For example, despite a persistent narrative that former Bill C-75 was soft on crime, I want to highlight that it explicitly strengthened the Criminal Code bail provisions as they relate to intimate partner violence. Former Bill C-75 made it more onerous for individuals previously convicted of intimate partner violence to obtain bail. This change was based on research suggesting that victims of intimate partner violence face a higher risk of violence from their intimate partners after charges are laid. This was a critical step in recognizing the unique risks posed by repeat offenders in intimate partner violence cases and in ensuring that survivors are protected.”
“Later that month, the Minister of Justice also announced publicly that bail and sentencing reforms will be forthcoming this fall to address growing concerns of repeat and violent offending at all stages of the criminal justice process. Over the summer, the Minister of Justice, the Minister of Public Safety and I undertook significant engagement with the provinces and territories, law enforcement and legal stakeholders alike to inform and develop these reforms. Now, although looking to future solutions is important, it is equally important to look to the past and to properly understand our criminal justice system and the current state of the law.”
“More specifically, the 2025 electoral platform includes commitments to change the law to direct courts to give primary consideration to the principles of denunciation and deterrence when determining a sentence for anyone who has numerous convictions. That means courts would have to primarily consider a sentence that would deter repeat offenders. It includes commitments to broaden sentencing tools by allowing consecutive sentences for violent or organized crime-related auto theft. The Prime Minister followed up on these electoral commitments when he agreed to strengthen the Criminal Code bail and sentencing laws during the June 2 first ministers meeting.”
“As set out in our 2025 electoral platform, our government is committed to strengthening the Criminal Code bail provisions to make it onerous to obtain bail for those charged with violent or organized crime related to auto theft, home invasion, trafficking in persons, human smuggling and drug trafficking. Our government is also committed to adding a requirement for courts to impose a firearms or weapons prohibition when granting bail to anyone charged with an organized crime-related offence. Our government has committed to reforming Canada's sentencing regime to better address repeat and violent offending.”
“It is encouraging to see alignment between the Conservative opposition and the newly elected Liberal government when it comes to improving public safety, including through the adoption of stronger laws to build safer communities. I have good news for my colleagues. The Minister of Justice will be introducing legislation during this parliamentary session to comprehensively change parts of the Criminal Code and other aspects of the criminal justice system. These comprehensive changes would strengthen bail reform in this country, to have harsher, longer sanctions for violent offenders and to make sure we have the support to help keep communities safe with direct investments in law enforcement.”
“Mr. Speaker, as Secretary of State for Combatting Crime, I appreciate the opportunity to debate this motion. Public safety and our bail and sentencing laws play a critical role in the criminal justice system. These are some of the most important laws that are supposed to ensure not only that justice is served but also that Canadians are safe in their communities. Over the past years, Canadians have raised legitimate concerns about violent crime and repeat offending. These concerns are real, and our government is working hard with law enforcement, Crown attorneys and other levels of government across this country to act on them.”
“Mr. Speaker, I do not disagree with a lot of what the member says, minus a lot of exaggeration and some oversimplification at times. We are bringing forward legislation that is going to reform the bail process. We have also brought forward other, smaller bills, wherein a lot of the work was already complete. Our strong borders act, Bill C-2 , was the second piece of legislation we brought into the House, and Bill C-9 , hate crime, is what we have before us. In a few weeks, we will have the bail reform as well. We are hard at work on this. I would like to know, from the member, whether he is going to support Bill C-2 , because what I have heard from a lot of the Conservatives is that they are in opposition to what law enforcement has asked for.”
“Mr. Speaker, we are fighting crime on all fronts. We are fighting guns at our borders with historic investments. We are in the process of hiring more CBSA and RCMP officers. We have a bill in the House, Bill C-2 , which would help fight criminal organizations and make our borders stronger. Getting assault-style rifles and shotguns out of our communities is also important. We are going to make sure we do this on all fronts. There are still 19,000 other makes and models of guns available for hunters and sport shooters, and they can use those options.”
“Mr. Speaker, the member references the compensation program for firearms. These firearms have been prohibited for the last several years. I want to thank the responsible gun owners who have stored these guns safely and now are waiting for a plan. In this plan, they will be compensated for those firearms that are now prohibited. I believe this plan will get assault-style firearms out of our communities, which is essential and important. There is no place for these types of weapons in Canada.”
“Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned, this piece of legislation would carry very stiff penalties. This crime has been accelerating at a pace that no other has, so it is really important to address it. I hope all members across the House take this bill seriously and support it and will show the utmost sincerity when studying it in the committee process so that we can protect Canadians and make sure that incidents like the one the member referred to are a thing of the past. It is very tragic what we are dealing with.”
“Mr. Speaker, in this country, we have many designated places to protest, and when people approach a cultural institution or religious place of worship and choose that to be their place of protest, it not only hurts the sentiments of the worshippers in that place but creates conflict. We have seen that. I have seen it in my own community. It creates divisions within society. I believe these are measures that many religious and minority groups have been calling for. We have seen a great rise in hate, hate speech, hate violence and hate crimes occurring in our communities. This bill would provide clear guidelines as to what is appropriate and what is not.”
“Mr. Speaker, my answer to both of those questions is that the definition of “hatred” was not in the Criminal Code. This piece of legislation now defines it, but that does not do away with precedents of the courts. We have a common-law system in this country, and both the precedents of the court system and our Criminal Code are referred to when judges make decisions. Prosecutorial oversight is still a thing. The majority of other criminal charges are laid by police of jurisdiction, except in provinces that have specifically given the right to Crown counsel to lay those charges. In particular, B.C. is one example. B.C. has a different system. However, Crown counsel are always able to make the decisions based on the evidence before them as to whether they are going to move forward with a charge in a court of law.”
“This bill also clarifies the definition of “hatred” using Supreme Court jurisprudence, so police, prosecutors and the public have clear guidance about where lawful expression ends and criminal hate begins. Moreover, Bill C-9 would remove the requirement that the Attorney General must personally consent for hate speech or propaganda charges, a change that gives law enforcement consistency, speed and certainty while retaining prosecutorial oversight. In closing, this bill is about protecting communities, affirming dignity and sustaining the democratic values we promised to defend. It sends a potent message: Canada will not tolerate hatred, in word or in symbol, in our streets, our schools or our sacred places. This Liberal government campaigned on a promise to confront hate. With Bill C-9 , we are acting on that promise.”
“This includes symbols associated with listed terrorist groups and the Nazi hakenkreuz . We are not using that word regularly anymore. The more popular, commonly used word has become the Nazi “swastika”. That is why we need a religious exemption. As mentioned in this House previously, a lot of these symbols are linked to other religions and have a long historical past, so it is really important to communities to reclaim their words as well. The Nazi hakenkreuz and the SS bolts are symbols listed in this piece of legislation, but we are explicitly, as mentioned, protecting legitimate uses of these symbols for educational, religious, artistic and journalistic purposes from being caught by this law.”
“It proposes four new criminal offences, each targeted at a distinct danger. Number one is intimidation or obstruction offences prohibiting those who intimidate or block access to places of worship, schools and community centres. These must be sanctuaries, not targets. The maximum sentence of up to 10 years' imprisonment underscores how seriously we take this issue. Number two is a hate-motivated offence, allowing any federal offence to carry an enhanced charge when motivated by hatred that is grounded in race, religion, sex or other things. This clearly condemns hate as more than a supplement. It is a central aggravating factor. (1730) Number three is an offence for publicly displaying certain hate or terrorist symbols, deliberately with intent to promote hate.”
“When hate is expressed as intimidation, threats, harassment and targeting of places of worship, the damage is intense. When access to cultural or faith-based spaces is blocked or obstructed, the harm is both symbolic and real. Victims describe depression, post-traumatic stress and withdrawal from community life. Their routines collapse under the weight of fear. Communities, too, pay a heavy price. Divisions deepen, trust frays and participation wanes. Over time, community bonds weaken, social cohesion unravels and fragmentation spreads. That is why Bill C-9 matters. In Canada, everyone, no matter who they are or where they come from, should be able to live without fear. This bill answers the calls across the country for stronger protections for religious and cultural spaces, and for communities under threat.”
“In 2024, Bais Chaya Mushka Girls Elementary School in Toronto was targeted in three separate shooting attacks. Luckily, no one was harmed, as the shootings occurred at times when the school was empty, but the emotional toll was severe. Students, staff and the broader Jewish community felt their sanctuary violated and their sense of security shattered. In response, every Jewish institution across the greater Toronto area reviewed security plans, training and monitoring. That is not just reaction; that is the cost of hate, even when physical violence is averted. These attacks remind us that hate does not wait for opportunity. It strikes where people feel safe. It breeds anxiety, forces communities into defensive postures and thins the line between public life and fear.”
“This increase has hit indigenous peoples, Black and racialized communities, religious minorities, 2SLGBTQI+ people, women and persons with disabilities especially hard, but we know the true story is far worse than even that. Most hate crimes go unreported. Research suggests as many as four in five victims never contact the police. That means the numbers we are seeing are only the tip of the iceberg. Statistics do not capture the everyday fear, disruption and trauma. Behind each file are a person whose life is shaken and a community whose confidence is eroded. Crimes motivated by hate are particularly corrosive. They do not just harm bodies. They attack identities. Their impacts ripple outward, damaging families' and entire communities' sense of safety and belonging. Let me offer one powerful example.”
“Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Surrey Newton . I rise in firm support of Bill C-9 , the combatting hate act, not just as legislation, but as a promise this new Liberal government is delivering for Canadians. This is about more than law; it is about dignity, safety and belonging. We campaigned on protecting vulnerable communities and confronting hate in all its forms, and that commitment demands action. Bill C-9 is our response to the urgent realities many Canadians face each day. Recent data from Statistics Canada paints a stark picture: Police-reported hate crimes have more than doubled in the last six years.”
“Madam Speaker, in consultations for this piece of legislation, we heard from many Jewish organizations. One issue they brought up was that having to have the charge cleared through the Attorney General made it so cumbersome that no charges were ever laid. Although there are currently provisions for hate crimes, although not a stand-alone one like the one the bill would create, they were very rarely enforced, and the community felt oftentimes threatened and intimidated, feeling like they were victims of hate crimes that were never prosecuted in court. I want to know what my colleague feels about those comments that came from Jewish organizations.”
“Mr. Speaker, this new government has made historic investments in our border, and that goes for CBSA as well. We are in the process of starting to hire 1,000 new personnel for the CBSA and 1,000 new personnel for the RCMP. We are going to do the work necessary so that guns do not get into Canada. We will make these necessary investments, while all the Conservatives did was make cuts, cuts to the CBSA, cuts to the RCMP and cuts to law enforcement that needed them the most. We are going to invest in these programs to make sure that we can fight crime in Canada.”
“Mr. Speaker, it is the RCMP that first exposed the Bishnoi gang in this country as an organization that is actively working in our neighbourhoods. It is a crime to extort Canadians. We will go after them. We have created a national task force to address this issue. Our national security experts are independently evaluating the listing of Bishnoi as a terrorist organization. I hope they will arrive at a decision soon so that we can continue to keep our communities safe.”
“Mr. Speaker, public safety is a top priority for this new government. National security experts independently evaluate and make recommendations on terrorist entity listings. This work is ongoing, and we hope to have a decision very soon.”
“Mr. Speaker, extortion is illegal in Canada. It carries a very stiff penalty. The Conservatives would like people to believe that it is legal to extort people; it is not. Extortion carries minimum sentences. We have created a national task force that is working on and monitoring all extortions and connecting police agencies across this country. Many arrests have been made. We will not stop there. We will continue to go after extortionists. It is illegal, and they will be put behind bars.”
“Mr. Speaker, we take crime, all types of crime, very seriously. That is why this government's second piece of legislation in this House was Bill C-2 , to make sure we give our policing organizations the tools they need to crack down on organized crime and on criminals who are running our streets. We do not need AR-15s in our country. That rifle was designed to kill human beings. If I could ask the Conservatives, why are you on the side of crime?”
“Mr. Speaker, the government has put historic investment into our borders to be able to keep illegal guns off our streets and keep Canadians safe. We are going to continue to bring further legislation that will tighten our sentencing and bail systems, but mass shootings are a crime, and we have several examples of mass shootings that have taken place in Canada and the United States. We should learn that lesson and get assault-style rifles off our streets.”
“Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives need to get serious about resolving and coming up with solutions when it comes to crime and when it comes to firearms in our country. When they were in government, the Conservatives cut funding to the RCMP and to our borders, and they would go back and make assault-style firearms legal in our country. If they care so much about the safety of our nation, maybe their leader should get a security clearance.”
“Mr. Speaker, we are moving forward in a responsible way to make sure that gun ownership in Canada is safe. There is no reason to have assault-style firearms on our streets or in our homes. We are going to be responsible. We are going to make sure we do not have the gun crisis that we see in the United States, just south of us. If Conservatives had their way, they would make guns free and legal for everyone.”
“Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives constantly want U.S.-style politics here, whether it is the “three strikes and you're out” rule or assault rifles on our streets, which the Conservatives would make legal again. We have seen these policies fail in the U.S., and they would not work here either. They should come up with some comprehensive, meaningful change like the change that we are going to bring with bail reform and sentencing reform.”
“Mr. Speaker, the second bill we put forward in this House was a public safety bill, and I would urge the member opposite to support that bill. It has been informed by law enforcement from across this country. Today, if a father catches a predator preying on their child, has an IP address and takes it to the police, the police cannot lawfully investigate and carry the case forward. This is a real example. Bill C-2 would allow that to happen. I hope the member will support this bill. I would like to hear if he will, to put an end to child sex offenders.”
“Mr. Speaker, the government is tough on crime. We are introducing new legislation this fall to strengthen our bail system for those charged with violent offences. Through our proposed stronger borders act, Bill C-2 , we are cracking down on organized crime, auto theft, fentanyl and human traffickers, and securing our borders. We are listening to Canadian law enforcement agencies, and we are going to ensure we put forward measures that keep Canadians safe.”