Cathay Wagantall
Yorkton—Melville, Saskatchewan · Conservative · Canada
“Mr. Speaker, I will move on to this. I move: Amendment That the motion be amended: (a) by adding after the words “be disposed of as follows:” the following: “(a) the bill shall be divided into two bills: (i) Bill C-22A, An Act respecting timely access to data and information, which shall be composed of clauses 2 to 40 of Bill C-22, (ii) B…”
“(1705) Nobody recognized me. They had phones outside the door here, over there and downstairs. They were trying to find me. They could not find me, because in every campaign, I look a little different. I said, “You have to do a better job of this.”
“I wonder if she will get it done. I then had one on protecting pregnant women. A lot of women came and talked to me and said they wanted access to abortion. I said, “Fine.” The truth is that 84% of Canadians want access to abortion. I said that there was a DART & Maru/BLUE poll that was done.”
“I could not do my job without my staff who are in my riding and, certainly, those here on the Hill as well. I am so grateful for every one of them who has been a part of my team. I want to thank the pages and all the folks who help us out in the lobby and put up with us on a daily basis. They are remarkable.”
“I will stop there, but his heart is what drives him, as does his love for being a servant leader and caring about people. When my mom passed away, he phoned me. When this happens to anyone in our caucus, he makes that call, and no one ever feels rushed when he is talking with them.”
“Many members get their name pulled out of that hat, but never get the opportunity because they are too far down the list. My predecessor was here for 22 years, and I do not believe ever had that opportunity. My passion is caring about violence against women.”
The complete record
Every one of 262 lines we hold for Cathay Wagantall, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 6.
“Mr. Speaker, thank you so much, and I thank you for your patience through this unusual event, I think. I thank everyone who has spoken and all who are here. It blows me away. I cannot forget to just quickly thank my riding. The people there are just phenomenal. I thank my family as well. It has been an honour to serve here. I am not leaving because I do not love the job. It is great, and we have a great House here. Let us make Canada proud.”
“that day, (ii) if a recorded division is requested in relation to the report stage, it shall not be deferred, (iii) if Bill C-22A is concurred in at the report stage, a motion for third reading may be made immediately thereafter, (iv) if a recorded division is requested in relation to the third reading stage, it shall not be deferred, (v) the House shall continue to sit beyond the ordinary hour of daily adjournment if required for the purposes of this order; and (f) it be an instruction to the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security that, during its consideration of Bill C-22B, (i) the committee shall not commence consideration of Bill C-22B before Monday, September 21, 2026, (ii) the committee shall receive at least six further hours of additional witness testimony, concerning the essential tools required by law enforcement to fight modem crimes within a framework respectful of Canadians' personal privacy, before commencing clause-by-clause consideration of Bill C-22B, (iii) the Privacy Commissioner of Canada or his representatives shall be invited to appear as witnesses during the clause-by-clause consideration of Bill C-22B.”; and (d) by deleting paragraph (g).”
“on June 15, 2026”, in subparagraph (ii), with the words “prior to the adoption of this order”; (c) by deleting paragraphs (b) to (f) and substituting the following: “(c) Bill C-22A may be taken up at the report stage at the next sitting of the House following the completion of the provisions of subparagraph (b)(iv) of this order; (d) not more than five hours shall be allotted to the consideration of Bill C-22A at the report stage and not more than five hours shall be allotted to the consideration of Bill C-22A at the third reading stage, provided that at the expiry of the five hours provided for the consideration at the report stage and at the expiry of the five hours provided for the consideration at the third reading stage, or when no member wishes to speak, whichever is earlier, any proceedings before the House shall be interrupted, if required for the purpose of this order, and in turn every question necessary for the disposal of the stage of Bill C-22A then under consideration shall be put forthwith and successively without further debate or amendment; (e) if Bill C-22A is taken up at the report stage on Friday, June 19, 2026, (i) report stage motions may be considered if filed with the Clerk of the House before 6 a.m.”
“Mr. Speaker, I will move on to this. I move: Amendment That the motion be amended: (a) by adding after the words “be disposed of as follows:” the following: “(a) the bill shall be divided into two bills: (i) Bill C-22A, An Act respecting timely access to data and information, which shall be composed of clauses 2 to 40 of Bill C-22, (ii) Bill C-22B, An Act respecting the obligations of electronic service providers in relation to authorized access to information, which shall be composed of the remaining provisions of Bill C-22, provided that Bills C-22A and C-22B shall each be reprinted and the Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel shall be authorized to make any technical changes or corrections as may be necessary to give effect to this motion;”; (b) in paragraph (a) by replacing, (i) the words “the bill”, wherever they appear, with the words “Bill C-22A”, (ii) the words “30 minutes”, in subparagraph (ii), with the words “three hours”, (iii) the words “by 4:30 p.m.”
“That tells us the kind of stress women on that side of the floor have, and people who value family and value women have, when women are being coerced within a terrible relationship or are facing a situation where they are being abducted, and the perpetrator is not accused of anything until they hurt that woman and possibly injure or kill the child as well. It is tough to stand here today and say this on the day that I am leaving. I know it is divisive in some ways, but this place needs to represent Canadians and Canadians' views. Never before—”
“However, they said, “What is wrong with you that you don't understand this is about women needing protection? Why do you always bring up abortion?” Well, I can tell members why. It is because it has become a tool on that side of the floor, actually the whole House, other than our party where we get to vote according to our conscience, that will not allow anyone to be part of their caucus if they have the same values here. Although, when the three women clapped, I thought, “Okay, this is good.” They actually ended up being three of the members who stood up in the House and tried to accuse me of bringing forward an anti-abortion law.”
“There are terrible people in this world who attack women and are in relationships where they are brutal. However, this case had absolutely nothing to do with anything that the pro-choice community does not want to see. It is for the protection of women when they are having their children. If we are truly concerned about feminism and women being attacked, on that side of the floor and on this side of the floor, it is something we could have all agreed on, but we do not, and that is fine. That is the reality of the makeup of the House. I can tell members that, from that study, and with 84% of Canadians wanting choice, when people saw that Twitter war, they went berserk online. We will not find any of the comments any more. They have been scrubbed. They are not there.”
“I am already at 15 minutes, but I am told I can keep going. When they clapped for this particular bill, it told me that people on that side of the floor, whom I know, have friendships with and meet with on a regular basis, value protecting pregnant women and want to see recognition that when a woman is carrying a child, they should have protection. In this case, Sherry and Chan Goberdhan lost their daughter, Arianna. Arianna had a very frightening marriage. Her estranged husband wanted her to come over. She was due to deliver, and her mom said, “Don't go.” She said, “It's okay, he just wants to talk.” He proceeded to stab her in the abdomen 21 times. When he was in prison and wanted to have a relationship with another woman, he took the picture of their wedding, removed her picture and put his picture up.”
“I then had one more opportunity under our leader , and I brought forward the violence against pregnant women act, regarding, again, a situation where a third party attacks a woman, knowing that she is pregnant, causing physical or mental harm. The only thing it was calling for was that it would be considered an aggravating factor. Joyce Arthur, who is the queen of the pro-abortion movement, said she could vote for it if it did these things, and it did them. It was two sentences. As soon as it was tabled, the previous prime minister and all of the women on the other side of the floor did a Twitter attack on me. When I had presented it in the House, in the first minute, when one just describes it, three colleagues from that side of the floor, women, clapped for it. (1715) I have to split my time apparently.”
“Our only friend in that field, other than democratic countries, is North Korea. This is appalling. That decision enabled me to bring forward the sex-selective abortion act. Women and nurses, who are pro-choice, as the vast majority of these people are pro-choice, want choice but they do not want baby girls to be killed simply because they are girls. I was in a feminist class. I was going to talk about being a woman in politics. As we walked in, the teacher said they had changed their mind, that they wanted to talk about that but that they had heard I had just put forward a bill on sex-selective abortion and they would like to talk about that. I thought, I am in a feminist class. What is that going to feel like? They were absolutely appalled. Of course, it did not pass. That is fine.”
“I wonder if she will get it done. I then had one on protecting pregnant women. A lot of women came and talked to me and said they wanted access to abortion. I said, “Fine.” The truth is that 84% of Canadians want access to abortion. I said that there was a DART & Maru/BLUE poll that was done. The National Post headline said that Canadians are not as divided on this issue as politicians and media would like you to think. They went further and asked if respondents thought it was okay to have a sex-selective abortion. The answer was no, that there should be a law against that. This came from the same 84% of people, as 16% of people did not fit into that category. They are for the abortion-at-any-time-for-any-reason law. Did we know that Canada has nothing? We have no laws. We are the only democratic country in the world that has nothing.”
“Of course, in the House, it did not pass but it brought huge attention to the fact that pregnant women are the most vulnerable when it comes to femicide, yet, in the House, they are never included in that conversation. I find that deplorable. I then did one on sex-selective abortion. One has to ask why. The Morgentaler decision was made, that it was too onerous for women to seek an abortion. They struck down what was there, but the Supreme Court said that there must be new legislation and that it must come with a determination of when that fetus is considered viable. None of that has ever happened. When I brought this forward, it was because I do a lot of trade shows and whatnot. I always have forms for people to sign, one on firearms and one on palliative care. We have a member over on that side of the floor.”
“He did not want what he was doing to be found out, so he attacked her and killed her. She was more than seven months pregnant, seven weeks from having her baby. They had already named her Molly. (1710) The individual was charged, went through the whole system and was facing his sentence. Jeff could not believe that, through this whole thing, there was no mention of Molly. It was like she did not exist, period. This was a mom who was excited about having her baby. She was not with Jeff anymore but they lived in the same block so that they would be close. They were setting up their baby rooms. I did what I could to bring that forward as Cassie and Molly's law.”
“Many members get their name pulled out of that hat, but never get the opportunity because they are too far down the list. My predecessor was here for 22 years, and I do not believe ever had that opportunity. My passion is caring about violence against women. The first bill was Bill C-225 , protection of pregnant women and their preborn children act, Cassie and Molly's law, in 2016. I phoned this young man named Jeff Durham from Windsor and asked if I could be helpful to him. He did not understand how what happened to his wife, who was seven months pregnant, meant that the law did not recognize her baby. Now, we know there are issues around this topic in other ways, but this was a situation where she was confronted by an intruder in her home, someone she and her husband knew. He worked alongside them. He panicked.”
“However, there is nothing there for them officially because our province is too small. We have begun something called the Yorkton Veteran Foundation that is going to change that, and I am very excited about that in our future. The other thing that I will share today is that I have had the incredible opportunity in this place, to do not one, not two, but three different private members' bills. For those at home, a private member's bill is something that an individual member gets to speak on and bring forward to possibly be passed. It may or may not be part of the member's party stance or something that is needed according to other people, but it is something very important to that member, their riding and the people they serve.”
“It was done improperly; there was no study of this unlicensed drug. It is a huge issue, and I want them to know that I am with them and will continue to be with them. I have been to every event that they have had over the course of the past 10 years. They will not give up on asking for an apology, a return to the Somalia inquiry and the care that they should have. Service dogs is another area that is very special to me. Saskatchewan is a lovely province. Shame on all who have not been there yet. It is interesting, we only have 1.3 million people in that entire gorgeous province. Somehow even CBC forgets that we have weather when doing the weather report. We do have veterans. There are over 150 who are couch-surfing or living on the streets in places like Regina and Saskatoon.”
“They are so gracious to me. It means the world to me that I have had the opportunity to be part of the study, “Invisible No More”. Our women who joined the Armed Forces faced great duress because they were not really welcome there. Now Bill C-11 means that they do not get to make the choice of where they are going to take their cases, whether to the civilian court or to the Canadian Armed Forces court. However, I love them and I appreciate the opportunity I had to be part of that. There is a group called the Mefloquine Rally warriors who were injured by that drug, when it was taken for malaria back in the days of Somalia. Something terrible happened on that deployment. They have suffered, and the government has not recognized that. They will continue to fight until that recognition is given.”
“(1705) Nobody recognized me. They had phones outside the door here, over there and downstairs. They were trying to find me. They could not find me, because in every campaign, I look a little different. I said, “You have to do a better job of this. You have to protect us.” The next day when I came to work somebody shared that there was an 8 1⁄2 by 11 laminated picture of me from Facebook on every desk in the precinct. To this day, they know who I am and that is great. Mr. Speaker, I am not going to split my time, just so you know. The things I want to share are the things that I loved having the responsibility for here. I have been on the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs since I came to this role. I have such a deep appreciation for our veterans. I am just a civilian; I had to learn, and I still do not know everything I need to know.”
“I could not do my job without my staff who are in my riding and, certainly, those here on the Hill as well. I am so grateful for every one of them who has been a part of my team. I want to thank the pages and all the folks who help us out in the lobby and put up with us on a daily basis. They are remarkable. I have a special place in my heart for our PPS, our protective services. When I was not allowed to do my job on the Hill because I would not share my status in regard to the COVID-19 vaccine, I was not allowed to be in the House, but I decided to come in finally. The Sergeant-at-Arms figured that out and escorted me. I was going to be apprehended, I believe my whip said. I did not know what that meant, but the Sergeant-at-Arms just escorted me down the Hill, and I said that I did not hold him responsible for what he had to do.”
“They all want to be named, but I am not going to go there. We are a team. What I love is something I learned when I was the only female on a board at a college where I was the athletic director. I learned, when I went to those meetings, to do my thing, make sure I am heard, argue as much as necessary and then go for coffee. That is what this team does, and it will be the best thing to ever happen to Canada in well over a decade, if not longer. I apologize to Mr. Harper, but I think it is going to be even better. I am so appreciative of my leader and my colleagues. Then there is my staff. I would love to name them all. I have been so blessed to have people in my office who love the things that I love, support the things that I support and go the extra mile over and over again to make sure I am prepared.”
“I will stop there, but his heart is what drives him, as does his love for being a servant leader and caring about people. When my mom passed away, he phoned me. When this happens to anyone in our caucus, he makes that call, and no one ever feels rushed when he is talking with them. With what happened at Tumbler Ridge, he was there not just for the service. I do not know if he would be appreciative that I am sharing this, but it is just who he is. He stayed until every one of those people had an opportunity to meet him and talk with him. He is gifted at understanding what needs to happen in this nation to give people their country back. I have been so honoured to be part of this caucus, and I wish nothing but the best for him as he moves forward with the most amazing group of people who serve in this caucus together.”
“Marty has a heart for ministry, so we went into ministry at a point later in our lives, and he was church planting, very entrepreneurial. There was a wonderful family from church we decided to take out for pizza one day, and they had a little girl named Katie. She jumped out of the car when we got to the restaurant, ran up to Marty, jumped and said, “Look, God, I got new shoes.” I had to explain to Katie that he was not God. I say that because I want to extend it over now into my appreciation for the leader of the Conservative Party of Canada , the current leader of His Majesty's official opposition. He is not God, but he is amazing. He has gifts that this country needs. He has the ability to process like no one I know. We experience this in our caucus meetings all the time.”
“Mr. Speaker, I rise today to give my last speech in this place. Having been here since 2015, I am retiring as of the end of the summer, and I appreciate this opportunity. I am going to begin with some comments about my husband, very briefly, though. He is my rock. At the age of 14, I wrote in the front of my Bible, “I want to marry someone who puts God first, me second and our children third.” Well, God outdid himself, and I had the opportunity to marry a man to whom, in my card for Father's Day, I wrote, “You are everything I ever dreamed of”, and then on the inside, it said, “plus a whole lot of things that never even crossed my mind.” We were married, have had quite an amazing life thus far and expect that to continue.”
“Mr. Speaker, I appreciated that my colleague talked about the various faiths right across the country that are supportive of this. When we had the opportunity to speak at a committee, and I did, I said that everyone has faith; it is just a matter of where they put that faith. An individual who is an atheist contacted me and said “Cathay, thank you so much, because what this is about is freedom." I would like the member to comment on that.”
“Their advocacy has helped create the opportunity for meaningful change. While legislation alone cannot undo the pain that many have experienced, it can help ensure stronger protection for the future and provide a clear framework for accountability.”
“That principle should be beyond dispute. The legislation gives Parliament an opportunity to reaffirm that principle in a meaningful way. I want to especially celebrate the people who have made this happen. Senator Yvonne Boyer is an amazing leader who has done an amazing thing in advocating for survivors and ensuring that their experiences cannot be ignored. Her work alongside indigenous organizations, legal advocates and community leaders has contributed significantly to the growing awareness of this issue across Canada. Most importantly, I want to recognize the survivors. To the survivors who have courageously shared their experiences, I want to express my incredible thankfulness. Their willingness to speak has brought attention to an issue that, unfortunately, many Canadians knew little about.”
“Clearly identifying forced or coerced sterilization as an aggravated assault would strengthen protections within the Criminal Code and affirm the importance of informed consent, which is something that should be spread across absolutely every procedure by medical professionals. It would also provide greater certainty for victims and survivors. Criminal law should clearly reflect the seriousness of conduct that permanently alters a person's reproductive capacity without their genuine agreement. At its foundation, informed consent requires more than a signature on a form. It requires that a person understands the nature of the procedure, the consequences involved and the alternatives that are available. It must be given voluntarily and without pressure. Consent obtained through intimidation, manipulation or coercion is not consent.”
“Others have spoken about the erosion of trust in medical institutions and the difficulty of discussing what happened, even with close family members. The impact of forced or coerced sterilization extends far beyond the procedure itself. For many survivors, it affects family relationships, emotional well-being and future life plans. It can also create lasting feelings of institutional betrayal and broken trust in the institutions that are expected to provide care and protection. I will remind this place that institutions are made up of people, and Parliament has a responsibility to respond. Bill S-228 represents an important step in that process and that response.”
“No government, institution or authority figure should ever have the power to decide that someone is less worthy of having a family because of their ethnicity, disability, economic circumstances or background. The experiences shared by survivors remind us of the consequences of that principle being forgotten or not being enforced. Forced sterilization is not simply a medical procedure performed without consent. It is a violation that affects families, communities and future generations. The harm extends far beyond a single moment in a hospital room. It leaves lasting impacts that survivors carry for years and, often, for decades. Other indigenous women have recounted similar experiences before parliamentary committees and in media reports. Some have described lasting feelings of grief and loss.”
““They rolled me in, gave me a consent form and they said, ‘just sign this, that's all you need to do.’” (1130) Sadly, hers is not the only story by far. Nicole Rabbit, a member of the Survivors Circle for Reproductive Justice, appeared before the Senate committee studying Bill S-250 , the predecessor to this legislation. In her testimony, she spoke about her own experience and about the impact forced sterilization had on her family across generations. She shared that in her family alone, she, her mother and her niece had all been sterilized against their will. It went across generations. Reflecting on the harm caused by these practices, Ms. Rabbit told the committee, “It’s like you wiped out a generation.” Those words should weigh heavily on every member of the House. Every human life has inherent value.”
“She testified that she was pressured into sterilization shortly after giving birth at the age of 21. I will read some of that testimony, taken from a CBC News article. It reads: Bear says she had never considered a tubal ligation before she underwent the procedure at Saskatoon’s Royal University Hospital in 2005. At the time, she was still in the hospital recovering from the birth of her fourth child. “They [health staff] told me it was contraception,” recalled Bear. “I was told because I was 21 and had four kids, that I probably shouldn't have any more, that my kids would be taken away by Child and Family Services.” “I thought, it's a threat.” Both she and her partner at the time were employed and owned their own home, she said. “I never had anybody say I was under the watchful eye of the ministry, of being a bad mom,” said Bear.”
“Bill S-228 affirms that every Canadian possesses equal worth, equal dignity and equal protection under the law. Indigenous women, women with disabilities and others have been disproportionately affected. Many have described coercion that occurred in moments of extreme vulnerability, such as while recovering from childbirth, under the effects of medication or facing significant pressures from authoritative figures. These accounts demand our attention. Coming forward to share deeply personal experiences requires extraordinary courage. Many have spoken publicly, not only to seek recognition for what happened to them, but also to ensure that future generations are protected from similar harm. One of those survivors is Katy Bear, a Cree woman from my home province of Saskatchewan, where, regretfully, this took place all too often.”
“Thousands of individuals were subjected to sterilization procedures, often without meaningful consent. While those laws were eventually repealed, the attitudes that allowed them to exist did not disappear. The Standing Senate Committee on Human Rights found evidence that forced and coerced sterilization continued long after formal eugenics legislation ended, and that reports of such practices have continued into recent decades. The lessons of the 20th century are clear. Whenever a society begins to judge the value of a human life based on ethnicity, disability, social standing or any other characteristic, fundamental rights are put at risk. When individuals are treated as problems to be managed rather than people deserving dignity and respect, abuse follows. Now we have an opportunity to further reject that ideology.”
“It would be easy to dismiss forced sterilization as a historical issue, but, quite shockingly, we have allegations and documented cases of coercion from less than 20 years ago. The practice of forced sterilization is disturbing, but its origin in eugenics is especially troubling. The history of eugenics influenced laws and public policy in Canada, especially in the early 20th century. Some of those laws remained in place until the 1980s. In that history, individuals were judged on the basis of disability, race, poverty, social status and other characteristics, and were labelled as unfit to reproduce. These harmful ideas led to sterilization laws in some provinces and influenced policies that disproportionately affected indigenous people, persons with disabilities and other vulnerable groups.”
“It would also reinforce the principle that sterilization must never occur without free, prior and informed consent. The Criminal Code has a needed exemption for medical professionals, but there is a gap when it comes to coerced or forced sterilization. Even though it happens by a licensed professional in a medical facility, it is still an invasive assault with permanent consequences. This conversation is not just about legal definitions, though. This is about women in vulnerable situations being coerced into a decision that will stay with them for the rest of their lives. It is about the dignity of the individual and the responsibility we share to protect those who may be vulnerable to abuse or exploitation.”
“Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of Bill S-228 , an act to amend the Criminal Code regarding sterilization procedures. This legislation addresses a practice that should not even exist. Every Canadian has the right to make medical decisions for themselves, free from coercion, intimidation or force. When that right is violated, the consequences can be lifelong. Bill S-228 would explicitly recognize forced or coerced sterilization as aggravated assault under the Criminal Code. The Criminal Code states that, “Every one commits an aggravated assault who wounds, maims, disfigures or endangers the life of the complainant.” Bill S-228 would add clarity by making it explicit that a sterilization procedure counts as wounding or maiming.”
“It is no wonder the PBO is also reporting that the Liberals are borrowing an extra $7 billion over their own budgeted amount. That is an additional $72 billion piled onto the backs of our youth this year alone, when they are already overburdened and desperate for relief. Conservatives warned that inflationary spending would weaken economic growth, drive away investment and leave Canadians—”
“Madam Speaker, I am sorry, but we will have $407 billion in interest alone over the next six years, and by 2031, the youngest voters will be facing the workforce with an additional $462 billion in national debt. That is not good money management by the government. Nothing has changed under the Prime Minister , and nothing will change until the government's reckless spending is stopped. For proof, Canada's youth need look no further than the G7 or even the G20, where Canada is the only member in a full-blown recession. Major banks, as well as the Parliamentary Budget Officer, are forecasting sluggish growth this year, and debt-to-GDP ratios are expected to continue to remain high, with virtually no chance of a decline over the next five years.”
“While the Liberals have no youth jobs plan, Conservatives have done the work and are determined to deliver results and real hope for their future. We will unleash the economy and restore the take-home pay Canadians need to break out of this Liberal debt cycle of their own creation.”
“We would move away from a one-size-fits-all approach to training and ensure that the Canada student financial assistance program provides relatively more support to students pursuing in-demand fields. We would also build homes where the jobs are by proposing a 100% capital cost writeoff for companies that build workforce housing. I am encouraged that the HUMA committee recently released an all-party unanimous report on youth unemployment. The report makes key recommendations to advance much of what Conservatives have proposed. Now is the time for the government to listen to Conservatives and their own MPs by implementing all of these recommendations. This is a critical moment. Rising unemployment and the cost of living will drive more Canadians to the breaking point, particularly Canada’s youth.”
“A cost of living crisis has come and many cannot find work. Even graduates with post-secondary education are increasingly unable to find jobs related to their training. After years of Liberal policies that have driven away investment, burdened small businesses and failed to match training with labour market needs, young Canadians are paying the price. They deserve opportunity, not unemployment. Through the Conservative youth jobs plan, our side of the floor would unleash the economy by repealing anti-resource laws, cutting taxes to drive reinvestment and eliminating red tape that is shutting youth out of the job market. We would fix immigration by repairing credential recognition and realigning immigration with labour and housing realities.”
“As I stated in my original question, by 2031, today’s 18-year-old first-time voter will be the workforce facing an additional $462 billion in national debt. With numbers like this, it is not at all surprising that Canada has the highest food inflation, the highest housing costs and the highest household debt in the G7, but this stark reality does not even factor in the youth jobs crisis. After years of Liberal stagnation and mismanagement, youth unemployment is now hitting 14.3% and overall youth employment is at one of the lowest points in decades. Students are being hit especially hard, with more than 17% of those looking for work and not able to find a job. Last summer, student unemployment reached levels not seen since the great recession. Young Canadians are trying to pay tuition, gain experience and build a future.”
“This is a matter that I believe should command the concern of absolutely every parliamentarian. In short, this is a federal government that has created an economic hole of its own design, is attempting to spend itself out of that hole and, simultaneously, refuses to take the common-sense steps that will create the long-term growth that Canadians desperately need. These young people, current and future taxpayers, are entering the working world with a bill that none of them anticipated and none of them deserve. Fully aware of the consequences, the Prime Minister chose to add another $54 billion of spending on the national credit card this year. Added to other out-of-control deficits over the past decade, Canadians will be saddled with $407 billion in interest alone over the next six years.”
“Madam Speaker, I am grateful for this opportunity to return to a question I asked the Prime Minister in April on his reckless spending. I am grateful not solely because the answer I received from the government was inadequate and devoid of hope for Canadians, but because I believe a whole generation’s future hangs in the balance. The poor choices the government has made over the past 10 years have put young people at a severe disadvantage. They are the future engine of our economy. They are the future tax base that will be asked to support an aging population and compete with a rapidly developing world. A responsible government would provide them with the opportunities and conditions to succeed. A responsible government, as it stands, however, we do not have. We have a federal Liberal government that has failed to meet the moment.”
“Madam Speaker, in speaking with our shadow justice minister, something he brought to my attention was that there are many mandatory minimums that are no longer protected, and we tried to give that protection back through our amendments, that have actually already been tested by the Supreme Court and found to be constitutional. What does that mean, when they can now simply decide to change the ruling?”
“Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for that observation. That is part of the problem we have. The government has introduced, over this last five to 10 years, bills that basically give more and more leniency than the expectations of citizens and people in our country to obey the laws of our land, treat other people with respect and not create scenarios where violence is allowed. It is not only allowed but also seems to be encouraged. “Poison pill” is something we use in the House to describe the Liberal government's legislation over and over again. As a matter of fact, my constituents are starting to use this term, because they see the good in a bill, but then they recognize when something has been interjected that is contrary to the value of a bill and is going to harm citizens rather than protect them.”
“Mr. Speaker, no victim should face a situation where they do not get justice from our courts. It is very frustrating to see the limitations, in a lot of ways, of our court system. At the same time, I am really frustrated with the fact that the federal government continues to pass the buck to our provinces. As one member was saying, we have had growth in populations and immigration has gone far beyond our capacity as a country to handle schooling, housing, jobs and education. I would also say, it has gone beyond our capacity for dealing with individuals who come to our country who perhaps add to the challenge of those court systems getting through all of their cases.”
“Mr. Speaker, I have to say I was really pleased to see some of the items in this bill with regard to protecting women when they are being attacked, and I am a little surprised, because when the government had opportunities to support private members' bills, two of them mine, that would have given protections to women and recognized when they were being attacked simply because they are pregnant or, in a case where the attacker, a third party, knows they are pregnant, there was no recognition at all of that circumstance. I call that a poor failure on the part of the government.”
“We continue to see the erosion of Canadians' safety when criminals' rights are put ahead of victims' rights. This is part of the problem with this approach to the charter. We have already indicated that a vast number of mandatory minimum sentences have been deemed constitutional, yet the government would be giving the judicial system, an activist judicial system, a window to go out and make huge changes to that. The passage of this provision would be a total abolition of our duty as elected representatives to keep Canadians and their communities safe. The Liberals should split this poison pill out of the bill so that parliamentarians can work together to pass Bill C‑16 .”
“The vast number of mandatory minimum sentences have already been deemed constitutional, and now the Liberals would be putting them in jeopardy when they have already passed that test of constitutionality. They would be allowing judicial activism. As a matter of fact, they are encouraging it toward lesser sentencing. On top of that, they are using hypotheticals rather than the real situation in front of them to make decisions that are actually causing more harm to victims and creating more violent crime in our country. The court's responsibility is to interpret and use the laws created by parliamentarians that are in the best interests of those who face the terrible conditions of violent crime. We have heard about many of those today.”