Glen Motz
Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, Alberta · Conservative · Canada
“Mr. Speaker, from August 11 to August 15, the city of Medicine Hat is thrilled to host the 2026 Special Olympics Canada summer games, welcoming 1,700 participants from across the country.”
“I encourage the residents of Medicine Hat and area and all Canadians to come and experience this extraordinary event and cheer on these amazing athletes. Unforgettable moments of competition and connection will be created as Canada comes together in celebration of these Special Olympics Games. I wish good luck to all participants.”
“Madam Speaker, the Liberals tell us that the judicial safety valve is necessary to ensure flexibility. However, the criminal justice system already has safety valves in it. Police officers exercise discretion and lay charges, and the prosecutor has discretion on how they are going to handle a case and what that will look like for them.”
“Mr. Speaker, I have sat here and heard for weeks now, since the decision was made, about how the Conservatives are spreading misinformation, yet we know government lawyers do not act on their own. They get direction, and that direction came directly from the cabinet to the government lawyers on principle 14 in this particular decision.”
“Mr. Speaker, despite the Liberal rhetoric, we know that the property values in the area impacted by this decision are having a significant impact on the homeowners. I am curious. Can our friend across the way answer how this decision is impacting his house-flipping business?”
“Mr. Speaker, the Liberals' costly credit card budget is more of the same: more debt, more spending, more taxes and higher inflation. The Prime Minister has doubled previous annual deficits. He had still added $54 billion in new spending, costing Canadians now $59 billion in debt interest charges to cover it.”
The complete record
Every one of 103 lines we hold for Glen Motz, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 3.
“Mr. Speaker, it is always interesting to hear my colleague from across the way. I am concerned about his health, as excited as he gets all the time with his questions. The part that troubles me is that we can have all this rhetoric from the other side, from the government, about what is happening with the economy and how well we are doing in comparison to other countries. However, I listen to the people in my riding; I hear stories from across the country, and they are all the same. I talked to a guy by the name of Bob, a senior from my riding, who called me on Friday afternoon. He has to sell his home because he cannot afford to live any longer. He cannot afford his groceries, cannot afford utilities on his house, insurance on his house. He cannot afford any of that stuff, and he cannot afford to rent once he sells his house.”
“Unfortunately, after 10 years of Liberal mismanagement, that promise has become increasingly out of reach. When the Liberals took office in 2015, Canada ranked number nine on the global quality of life index. After 10 years of reckless Liberal spending and mismanagement, Canada has fallen to 27th place, the largest drop of any of the top 30 countries. Therefore, on behalf of the Canadians who can no longer afford to eat, heat or house themselves because of Liberal inflation, Conservatives do not support any aspect of this costly budget. We will continue to put forward amendments to improve Canada's quality of life by cutting taxes on groceries, work, energy and homebuilding. We will fight to restore the promise of Canada. My hope is that all parties in the House will work with us to deliver a positive, hopeful and affordable future.”
“It is not just industry leaders who are concerned about the Liberal housing plan; the Liberal member for Beaches—East York , the Prime Minister 's former minister of housing, said that the housing measures in budget 2025 are, unfortunately, very “unlikely to move the needle on development”. To use his own phrasing, budget 2025 “falls well short” of addressing the Liberal housing promises and “does not live up to its promise of generational investments.” If the Liberals want to get serious about restoring housing affordability, they should get out of the way and scrap the red tape and taxes that make it impossible to build. The promise of Canada has always been that every person, no matter where they are from, can work hard and build a life with a stable job, an affordable home and a strong future in the freest country on earth.”
“Despite the Prime Minister 's promise to build 500,000 homes annually at speeds not seen for generations, his own agency confirmed that new home construction dropped 17% this past October alone, falling to less than half of his target. The president of the Building Industry and Land Development Association revealed the Liberals' misleading claims in the budget. He reported: This budget relies on backward-looking data that provides false reassurances that Canada’s housing sector is prospering and that affordability is improving. But these are stale statistics. The latest figures show that new home sales have evaporated across all housing types in every major city across Canada – and a hundred thousand jobs are at risk.”
“The Liberals have only themselves to blame for Canada's fiscal outlook, their poor fiscal outlook, yet instead of bringing down the deficit, they are attempting to silence those who hold them accountable. While typical of the government's record of avoiding accountability and transparency, it is nonetheless completely unacceptable. Despite these accounting tricks, the Liberals cannot hide from the fact that every dollar they spend comes out of the pockets of hard-working Canadians, causing higher prices, lower paycheques and bigger bills. In addition to massively increasing Canada's debt, budget 2025 fails to address the housing crisis so many Canadians are facing. Since the Liberals took office, housing prices have risen 32% faster than incomes in this country, turning Canada into the most unaffordable housing market in the G7.”
“(1600) In his report, the PBO found the Liberals' definition of capital investment to be “overly expansive”, going way beyond the internationally accepted definition adopted in other countries. Using a more accepted definition, the PBO found $94 billion in spending misclassified as capital and said, “based on our definition, the operating balance in Budget 2025 would remain in a deficit position”. This report by the impartial budget watchdog lays out a clear fiscal outlook for Canadians. Not a single fiscal anchor is likely to be met, and these dangerous deficits will continue to drive up the cost of essentials and make life even more unaffordable. In light of this analysis, the Liberals are now trying to get rid of this PBO, looking for a new officer who has “tact and discretion”.”
“Despite changing the goalposts, the PBO's report found that “it is unlikely that the Government’s declining deficit-to-GDP fiscal anchor will be respected.” It is disappointing, though not surprising, that the Liberals have resorted to accounting tricks to create confusion instead of working to get their deficit under control and stop their reckless spending. On top of these shifting targets, the Liberals are trying to distract from their record-breaking deficit by differentiating between operating and capital spending, despite the bottom line of Canada's debt remaining unchanged. Their fiscal anchor of balancing the operating budget by 2028 gives the illusion of fiscal stability while allowing the government to rack up huge deficit spending on the capital side of the books.”
“Even more shocking was the report released by the Parliamentary Budget Officer, Parliament's neutral, non-partisan official responsible for providing economic and fiscal analysis to parliamentarians and Canadians. The report found that Canada's traditional fiscal anchor, the debt-to-GDP ratio, “is no longer projected to be on a declining path”. This long-standing fiscal anchor is important not only for fiscal sustainability but also for preserving Canada's AAA credit rating. This fall, to avoid accountability, the Liberals quietly replaced Canada's long-standing debt-to-GDP fiscal anchor with a new one, maintaining not a declining debt-to-GDP, but rather a deficit-to-GDP, ratio. This one-word change effectively dismantled the fiscal anchor that has existed for more than 30 years in a process that was certainly far from transparent.”
“What this unbelievable amount really means is that the federal government is spending more on annual debt interest costs than it is on federal health transfers to the provinces or than is collected in GST revenues. This level of spending is not just reckless; it is dangerous and puts the future of our nation at risk. It is not just Conservatives who are concerned about this reckless spending. Experts from across the country have spoken out against this record-breaking Liberal deficit. Fitch Ratings, one of Canada's top credit rating agencies, warned that rising fiscal spending and debt burden have weakened the country's credit profile, putting Canada's AAA credit rating at risk.”
“Budget 2025 would add nearly $80 billion to our national debt this year alone, the highest amount in Canadian history outside of COVID, all the while keeping Liberal taxes on groceries, work, energy and homebuilding. This budget would add $10 million to our debt every hour, and the Liberals intend to add another $321 billion to Canada's debt over the next five years. What many Canadians may not know is that, as a direct result of the Liberal reckless spending, our national debt is now at $1.35 trillion. This means that every Canadian, infant to senior, owes $33,000 as their share of Canada's federal debt, and as our debt rises, so too does the interest burden on that debt. Budget 2025 revealed that $55.6 billion will be required to debt service or interest charges this fiscal year alone.”
“Conservatives have heard these concerns echoed by families, individuals and businesses across the country, which is why, before the budget was tabled, we presented the Prime Minister with a common-sense plan that laid out our expectations for an affordable budget. In our pre-budget meetings, Conservatives demanded the Liberals include measures in their budget to address the cost of living crisis by scrapping hidden taxes on groceries and gas, cutting taxes on work and homebuilding, and ending the reckless deficits that fuel inflation. Sadly, the November 4 budget missed that mark. It would fail to provide any meaningful relief for Canadians struggling to make ends meet.”
“Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise in the House to speak on behalf of the good people of Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner. Today it is to discuss budget 2025. This fall, before the budget was tabled, my office sent out a survey across my riding to hear directly from constituents about their priorities and expectations for the 2025 budget. An overwhelming 76% of respondents listed the cost of living as their top concern, and nearly 80% of business owners said rising costs are hurting their operations. Of the respondents, 85% said that they are concerned about their financial future, and 88% said they do not believe that Canada's economic situation will improve in the near future.”
“The Liberals need to realize that every dollar they spend comes out the pockets of hard-working Canadians. My voters are demanding that the Liberals stop the reckless spending that is driving up the cost of everything.”
“Mr. Speaker, this fall, my office surveyed southern Alberta residents about their priorities and expectations for the federal budget. An overwhelming 76% of respondents indicated the cost of living is their top concern, and 80% of business owners said the rising costs were hurting their operations. Interestingly, 88% did not believe Canada's economic situation would improve in the next year. Sadly, they are correct. The Prime Minister 's “spend less” promise has been shattered, with an $80-billion budget deficit this year alone, the highest ever in Canadian history outside of COVID. This year's interest on the national debt will be a staggering $55.6 billion, even more than our health transfers. The budget is adding $10 million to our debt every hour, which equals approximately $33,000 for every Canadian and is climbing rapidly.”
“Mr. Speaker, what has happened in this country over the last 10 years is that the public trust in our entire justice system has waned. Examples like this, where judges make decisions that might be considered inappropriate, or where the laws of the government have undermined the great work of law enforcement across this country, certainly cause people to ask, “What is the use?” and to say that we need a change in government to fix it.”
“Mr. Speaker, that is a great question, and I have similar questions. I am puzzled by the government's bringing the bill forward and not putting up any speakers to defend it nor to speak about how they want to improve the bill or how they want to work with the opposition to improve the bill. My Bloc colleague asked a question that I cannot answer. The government would have to answer why it is not putting up people to speak to its own bill. I do not know.”
“Mr. Speaker, I have many good friends and former colleagues who were or are members of the RCMP. Even now, I ask people from the force whom I meet in different communities about how things are going. They tell me very clearly that there is a disconnect between upper management and them. There are operational issues that are not being addressed by the RCMP leadership. That disappoints me. The RCMP no longer has the stellar reputation it once had. That concerns me as well. It is our national police service and has great responsibilities on national security, defence and those types of investigations. It is important that it be given the opportunity—”
“We are ready to support provisions in the bill that protect our national security and secure our borders while proposing amendments that would improve the bill and opposing measures that go against the best interest of Canadians. Bill C-12 introduces significant changes that require in-depth study to ensure the problems are addressed appropriately. At committee, Conservatives will scrutinize, debate and propose amendments to Bill C-12 and work together to ensure it achieves its stated goal of improving Canada's public safety and national security. Conservatives remain committed to securing our borders, strengthening our immigration system and cracking down on crime and chaos in our streets.”
“We support measures that streamline processing, reduce backlogs and help newcomers integrate successfully, but we oppose policies that put power in the hands of ministers without proper oversight. Canada's immigration system needs complete, wholesale changes to ensure a secure border and prosperous nation, but those changes are nowhere to be found in C-12 . Like many Canadians, Conservatives want safe communities, secure borders and an immigration system that works for our country, not one that is collapsing under the weight of the Liberal government. The safety and security of Canadians is non-negotiable and, as the official opposition, Conservatives remain committed to implementing the tougher, smarter measures that are needed to keep Canadians safe.”
“Even worse than that, if anyone can imagine, the Liberals have lost track of hundreds and hundreds of foreigners in this country who have criminal records and are due to be deported. Guess what, they have gone missing. This backlog of applications, lack of accountability and inconsistent enforcement all stem from a government that has failed to plan, failed to listen and failed to act. Now, with Bill C-12 , the Liberals are scrambling to fix the very system they dismantled, but instead of thoughtful reform, they are reaching out for sweeping powers and vague regulations that permit activities rather than legislating requirements for change. Conservatives believe in responsible immigration in appropriate numbers to keep up with our health care, housing and job markets.”
“Having a secure border also means having a strong, robust immigration system that serves the needs of Canadians and aligns with our national interests. Parts of Bill C-12 attempt to address some of the challenges our immigration system faces after 10 years of Liberal mismanagement. Unfortunately, I am not confident that these measures by themselves will fix our broken system, which is clearly collapsing under the weight of Liberal mismanagement. This week, the CBC reported that processing times for Canadian immigration applications have reached unprecedented lengths. Wait times, for example, for permanent resident applications are up to nine years for the caregiver pathway, up to 19 years for the agri-food stream and up to 35 years for entrepreneurs under the start-up visa stream.”
“That does not sound like a very secure border to me and, unfortunately, Bill C-12 does little to address the issue. Instead of investing in border security, the public safety minister has doubled down on the Liberals' failed gun confiscation program, which he himself admitted is a waste of money that will do nothing to keep Canadians safe. The $742 million the Liberals say they intend to spend on gun confiscation could have gone to hiring 5,000 more police officers or CBSA officers or purchasing 300 port scanners. Instead of including measures in Bill C-12 to ensure border officials have the proper resources needed to secure the border, the Liberals remain committed to targeting law-abiding hunters and firearms owners.”
“The Liberals' persistence in allowing house arrest for serious offences, which include offences involving firearms, if members can believe it, continues to endanger lives. It is not just the fentanyl crisis the Liberals are playing catch-up on. Their failure to get serious on our border has allowed for an increase in illegal gun smuggling, driving organized crime in Canada. Gun crime has risen 130% since the Liberals took office. In July, the Prime Minister himself even said, “The vast majority of firearms, illegal firearms, firearms used in crime, come across our border.” (1320) According to the Toronto Police Service, 88% of guns used in crimes seized by the Toronto Police Service in 2024 were traced back to the United States, including 94% of the firearms that were seized.”
“Fentanyl is not just a drug problem; it is a public safety and national security risk and a crisis fuelled by organized crime and enabled by weak borders. Part 2 of Bill C-12 , as in Bill C-2 , would amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act to fill a loophole in the act by banning precursor chemicals for fentanyl. This is an important first step, but the Liberals are addressing only a small part of the issue and doing too little, too late. Bill C-2 is silent on the tools police and prosecutors actually need to address this crisis. The Liberals' catch-and-release policies are alive and well for those who traffic in fentanyl and firearms. The principle of restraint in Bill C-75 directs the courts to release violent offenders on bail at the earliest opportunity, under the least onerous restrictions.”
“While Bill C-12 contains positive provisions to streamline investigations and improve information sharing, it falls short in addressing some of the pressing public safety concerns facing Canadians. The Liberals' failure to secure our border and crack down on organized crime has fuelled a fentanyl crisis and put countless lives at risk. The Liberals' reckless drug legalization experiment, combined with their soft-on-crime bill, Bill C-5 , has fuelled Canada's deadly drug crisis. Bill C-5 scrapped mandatory jail for fentanyl production and trafficking, for example. Last fall, police dismantled the largest and most sophisticated drug lab in Canadian history, capable of producing multiple kilograms of fentanyl each week, along with caches of loaded firearms, explosives and half a million dollars in cash.”
“Bill C-12 may be a starting point, but I believe it requires significant amendments and vigorous study at committee. There is no doubt that tougher and smarter measures regarding borders and immigration are desperately needed to keep Canadians safe. While I am happy that the Liberals are willing to work with the opposition parties to address Canada's border security and immigration issues, it is important to note that much of the urgency surrounding the legislation is a direct result of 10 years of Liberal mismanagement. The Liberals have failed to take our borders seriously, resulting in increased gun smuggling, driving up violent crime; an immigration system that is completely out of control; a fentanyl crisis; and an increase in human trafficking. These are all destroying the lives of Canadians.”
“The safety and security of Canadians is non-negotiable, and Conservatives have been clear: Canadians should not have to choose between having a secure border and having their civil liberties protected. Given the scope and complexity of the bill, Conservatives proposed that Bill C-2 be split into two separate pieces of legislation, with one that is narrowly confined to border and immigration measures, to ensure that all aspects of the legislation receive proper scrutiny. I am pleased that, along with our other opposition members, we were able to successfully force the Liberals to table the new bill, which we will continue to examine thoroughly to ensure that the bill does not include any measures that would breach law-abiding Canadians' privacy rights.”
“Mr. Speaker, it is always an honour to rise in this House on behalf of the good people of Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner. Today, I am going to be discussing Bill C-12 . This is the Liberals' second attempt at addressing our broken border and immigration system. It was introduced in the House recently, thanks to my Conservative colleagues' work and my work in forcing the Liberals to back down on their first border bill, Bill C-2 , because of its serious violations regarding the freedom and privacy of Canadians. As the official opposition, it is our job to scrutinize the government and oppose legislation when it is against the best interest of Canadians.”
“Mr. Speaker, let us get back on track to the topic at hand. In Bill C-2 , there was a failure to group the different topics that were in it. Bill C-12 is a step in the right direction; however, serious amendments are required to the bill. Can you just highlight, in your opinion, some of the more poignant issues that Bill C-12 needs amendments for? We are hopeful that the government will listen to the amendments that Conservatives intend to bring forward.”
“Courageous people do not wait for safer circumstances; they step forward in faith and trust God with the outcome. We must remember that our influence matters. Our voices can be used to bring justice, freedom, hope and life, but only if we are willing to use them.”
“Mr. Speaker, the world desperately needs more people who do not fold under pressure, but who are guided by grace and use their influence not for personal gain, but for justice, those who are willing to stand in the gap for others, to boldly speak the truth, to protect the vulnerable, to fight against injustice and to take risks to do what is right. I believe these are the kinds of people we are all called on to be, people who are willing to step up and speak out even when it is uncomfortable or perhaps even risky. Too often we shrink back from those moments. We choose silence. We fear conflict. We act impulsively or we accuse. There is a better way. We can choose our moments carefully, deliver our words with wisdom and clarity, act with courage and always be respectful.”
“Mr. Speaker, the Liberals' oil and gas emissions cap will continue to devastate jobs in the energy sector and make life more expensive for Canadians. The Parliamentary Budget Officer estimates that the emissions cap will cut our GDP by about $20.5 billion annually and eliminate 54,000 more jobs by 2032. The Prime Minister promised he would be different, but those promises have been broken. Will the Prime Minister support the Conservative motion to repeal the oil and gas emissions cap, or will he and the Liberals continue to be obstructive?”
“Mr. Speaker, that is a very loaded question that is going to require a lot of time to answer. In its present form, I believe that unless the proper clarity and checks and balances are put in place, the bill would have the potential to reach beyond its initial intent, to reach beyond the ability to keep our nation safe and Canadians safe. It has potential. That is why we need to study it at committee. That is why we need to have vigorous debate. That is why we need to have all parties, the government included, open to constructive amendments that would make the bill strong and actually achieve the measures that we intend it to.”
“Mr. Speaker, I had the same fright when I saw the government's initial proposal to have Canada Post deal with the confiscation of firearms. It is not appropriate. Canada Post has an obligation. I appreciate the fact that we need to adjust the Canada Post act to even allow for law enforcement to be able to obtain a warrant to gather and seize evidence, but it needs to be law enforcement, not Canada Post individuals.”
“Mr. Speaker, this is an important piece of legislation. It would have a far-reaching impact, both positive and negative, if we get it wrong. We need to ensure that the committee is given as much time as it needs. This is not something that should be brushed over because of the urgency being pushed from the United States. Canadian rights and freedoms need to be protected, but we also need to have tools that do not hinder the ability of law enforcement to do its job in a lawful manner and to keep our national security and community safety at the forefront.”
“Mr. Speaker, if that is exactly what the bill said, then there is nothing wrong with it, but it does not say that. This is why it is so important that the work of the committee is done in a non-partisan fashion to clear up any ambiguity and provide clarity so that, exactly as my friend across the way suggested, things are done in a lawful, rights-protected manner by law enforcement, not Canada Post opening letters, and that they do it under the authority of a warrant.”
“Bill C-2 is a step in the right direction, like cracking down on terrorist financing, but we have concerns, and we oppose other provisions in the bill. The bill needs to be scrutinized. My hope is that the Liberals are open to non-partisan co-operation in ensuring that the bill achieves the stated goal of meaningful improvement to Canada's public safety and national security while safeguarding Canadians' rights and freedoms so that law-abiding Canadians are not treated like criminals.”
“Conservatives are concerned about Bill C-2 's potential impact on Canadians' privacy and freedoms, and we will ensure that they are respected. As I have mentioned, Bill C-2 is sweeping in its scope, and I do not believe that Canadians should have to choose between having a secure border and having their civil liberties protected. Given the scope and complexity, Conservatives are proposing that Bill C-2 be split into two separate pieces of legislation: one confined to border security and immigration, and the other to everything else. My hope is that the Liberals will receive that as intended. Like most Canadians, we all want secure communities and borders, and immigration that works, and the safety and security of Canadians is not negotiable.”
“The bill would introduce provisions to provide greater authority for police, CSIS and authorized persons to access online subscriber information from electronic service providers without the need for a warrant. I understand that this is important in some circumstances, but I believe that digital privacy is a fundamental right of Canadians, and we must ensure that the legislation would not lead to law-abiding citizens' being treated like criminals. While action on our borders and the need for increased national security enforcement is desperately needed, I want to be clear that I do not support granting excessive, unchecked powers to government or law enforcement, in most circumstances, without due process, proper oversight and respect for Canadians' rights.”
“While I appreciate that the government says its intent here is to prevent money laundering by criminals, who predominantly use cash, without further legislative clarity, this has raised concerns from charities, community groups, rural communities and many individuals who rely on cash for their daily business activities. The provision would risk limiting Canadians' freedom to use legal tender, including cash, as they may choose. Conservatives oppose any move to ban cash or require mandatory digital transactions, and believe that these changes must undergo rigorous scrutiny at committee. Parts 14 and 15 of Bill C-2 have introduced measures which would curtail individual freedoms and have raised concerns that innocent individuals, not just criminals, may be caught by the provisions of the bill.”
“All of these proposed changes are significant and have potential, but they require in-depth study to ensure they address the problems appropriately. Beyond immigration, Bill C-2 , in part 10 and part 11, contains provisions to crack down on money laundering, terrorist financing and organized crime. Part 10 proposes to increase penalties and replace optional FINTRAC compliance agreements with a mandatory regime. It would expand FINTRAC's registration to include more entities and would authorize FINTRAC to share information with Elections Canada. (1905) These are all sound proposals. However, in part 11 of the bill, the Liberals are proposing to ban certain entities from accepting third party cash deposits, any cash payments, donations or deposits of $10,000 or more.”
“The absence of legislating it and having enforcement mechanisms casts doubt on whether meaningful action would follow or whether this would be yet another empty promise. Parts 7, 8 and 9 of Bill C-2 include proposed substantial changes to the in-Canada asylum claim eligibility. It would expand the minister's authority to suspend or cancel immigration documents for reasons determined to be in the national interest and proposes changes to the safe third country agreement so that anyone who crosses the border between official ports of entry would be ineligible to apply for asylum immediately after arrival and could be returned to the United States during that period if they do not qualify for an exception.”
“Parts 6 to 9 of Bill C-2 attempt to address some of the challenges our immigration system faces after 10 years of Liberal mismanagement. I strongly believe that the role of government is to protect our national security. We must ensure that our national security apparatus and law enforcement agencies have the legislative tools necessary to do their jobs and do them well. Part 6 of the bill introduces amendments to the Department of Citizenship and Immigration Act and the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act to allow information sharing between various government departments and agencies, but only if a written agreement exists. I applaud the opening of communication between federal agencies, but the bill would permit these activities through regulation rather than simply legislating that requirement.”
“However, Bill C-2 fails to address the serious matter of appropriate sentencing for fentanyl dealers, for example, given the Liberals' failure to repeal their soft-on-crime bill, Bill C-5 , and their catch-and-release legislation in Bill C-75 . Part 4 of Bill C-2 would expand the powers of Canada Post, allowing it to open anything during post. While I agree that the Canada Post Act requires some amendments, the searching and opening of mail should be limited to law enforcement agencies with judicial authorization. I remain concerned that some of the sweeping changes embedded in this omnibus bill could undermine privacy protections across Canada. Having a secure border means having a strong, robust immigration system that serves the needs of Canadians and aligns with our national interests.”
“Conservatives have been calling for a stronger response to public safety, border security and immigration for years. I am pleased to see that some aspects of Bill C-2 take meaningful steps in helping to streamline investigations, fight money laundering and ensure sex offenders are dealt with properly under the Sex Offender Information Registry Act. Having the appropriate tools is critical in keeping our borders secure, disrupting illegal financing and fighting transnational organized crime and fentanyl. Part 2 attempts to begin to address the fentanyl crisis by proposing to amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act to fill a loophole in the act. It proposes to do this by banning precursor chemicals for fentanyl, which is critically important.”
“Mr. Speaker, Conservatives are ready to support provisions in the bill that are in our national interest and secure our borders while proposing amendments by which the bill can be improved and opposing measures that go against the best interest of Canadians. Before I get into the specifics of the bill, it is very important to note that much of the urgency surrounding the legislation is the direct result of 10 years of Liberal inaction on border and immigration enforcement. Let us not forget it was the new Trump administration that actually forced this issue, causing the Liberals to finally take these concerns seriously. It was about time. Through the introduction of the bill, the Liberals are trying to address problems they not only created but also allowed to reach a crisis level.”
“The broad nature of the bill and the substantial changes proposed require vigorous study and debate at committee, with numerous expert witnesses from all perspectives to get the important legislation right, because as tabled by the government, I believe it is flawed and requires amendments to fix and strengthen it. As the official opposition, Conservatives remain committed to implementing tougher and smarter measures that are needed to keep Canadians safe. We are ready to support provisions in the bill that are in our national interest and secure our borders while proposing—”
“Mr. Speaker, it is always an honour to rise and to represent the great people of Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner. This summer, like many members of the House, I had the privilege of meeting with constituents from all across my riding, hearing directly from them on issues that matter most to them. I want to thank everyone who took the time to connect with me, because their voice matters. Today I would like to discuss Bill C-2 , known as the strong borders act. Despite its simple name, Bill C-2 is an omnibus piece of legislation that includes 16 separate parts and would make amendments to 19 different acts of Parliament.”
“Conservatives are calling on the government to get taxpayers their money back within 100 days and impose a lifetime contracting ban on GC Strategies. Canadians are watching to see if the government will actually support them in getting their money back.”
“Mr. Speaker, the Auditor General just released a scathing audit on arrive scam contractor GC Strategies. Last year, the government awarded 106 contracts to GC Strategies, worth a total of $92 million, with $64 million already paid out. However, 50% of these contracts did not enforce security requirements. Much of the work performed was not monitored. Many contractors did not have the experience or qualifications needed. Procurement policies were not followed, and there was no demonstration of value for money, nor that deliverables were actually received. Yet, unbelievably, the government kept authorizing payment. Every time there is a Liberal corruption scandal, it seems that the ministers responsible get promoted and the taxpayer gets the bill.”