SoVote

Feb/6/24 1:07:40 p.m.
Watch

I want to thank the hon. member for the information. We will take that under advisement and come back to the House as soon as is practical.

27 words

All Topics

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)

Feb/6/24 1:07:59 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I started by acknowledging that crimes of the nature we have been talking about today affect all our communities. As much as we banter back and forth, I would not want to take anything away from the impact it has on victims. I wanted to amplify that point because I truly believe that all of us have a right to feel safe and comfortable in the communities where we live. As the justice critic, when I served in the Manitoba legislature, as well as during a number of years here in Ottawa, I have always recognized the importance of the issue of safety and crime. As legislators, we need to do what we can to keep our communities safe. Quite frankly, I am very proud of initiatives the Liberal government has taken over the last number of years to do just that: to keep the communities we live in safe. That does not mean the issues are resolved. I am not saying that at all. I think we have work to do. We will continue to look at ways to make our communities healthier and safer. Looking at today's opposition day motion, I see that it is very much a politically motivated issue brought forward by the Conservative Party. The message it is trying to give Canadians is that it is collectively tough on crime. I want to deal with that, because that is not the reality we have seen. Specifically, we are talking about automobile theft. The discussions, thus far, from the Conservative benches have been focused on Canada's border control, car theft and how vehicles are exported outside of Canada. It is interesting that one member who stood up actually criticized the government. That really stuck with me. The member said something to the effect that we need to support and to provide more money to the CBSA, Canada's border control agency. It is amazing that while the Conservatives were in government, they actually cut Canada's border control agents. At one time, we had close to 15,000 border controls. I have the actual number of full-time equivalents: 14,833. They were cut to 13,774 full-time equivalents. Those were well over 1,000 jobs cut by the former government and the former prime minister. The current leader of the Conservative Party sat in the cabinet of that former prime minister. That was a substantial cut, and now they are saying we need to have more. That was one comment. The Conservatives talk about it being in the motion. We talk about increasing sentences from six months to three years. That six months is in regard to someone getting caught stealing a car on a third occasion. The current law states that it is a minimum of six months. The Conservatives say that it is not tough enough and that they believe it should be three years. Again, who do members think put in the six months? It was Stephen Harper. Are Conservatives saying today that Stephen Harper messed up on that policy directive, and that Stephen Harper messed up on the cutbacks on the border controls? What the member did not reference, but I will, are the hundreds of millions of dollars cut also by Stephen Harper. Is the Conservative Party now saying that, too, was a mistake? Let us keep in mind that it is easy for the Conservatives to concede that Stephen Harper made a mess of things and made problems a lot worse with cutbacks, and that might have contributed to the increases we are seeing. I would remind Conservatives that they might want to throw Stephen Harper under the bus, but their current leader was a minister in Stephen Harper's government, and they need to be reminded of that. Let us think about it. This issue has been taking place for quite a while. The so-called “tough on crime” Leader of the Conservative Party, tougher than Stephen Harper was on crime, is tougher than when he was in cabinet. To the best of my knowledge, it was the first time, last week, where we actually have the Leader of the Conservative Party giving it attention. Why is that? We announced that we are going to have a summit on the auto theft issue. The Liberal government has been working on it for a while now, unlike the Conservatives; it was not even on their radar screen until we announced the summit. Then, the Conservatives started saying that it would fit in nicely with their “tough on crime” bumper stickers, so they brought up the issue. Did they not study it? Did they not realize they are likely part of the problem? I was the justice critic in the Province of Manitoba, and this is a quote from a StatsCan report dealing with car theft in Manitoba then, which states: However, the province's 2007 rate remained the highest in the country...for the 11th straight year and was 24% higher than a decade ago. In 2007, Stephen Harper was prime minister, and it continued to be a problem for years after that. If we look at it 10 years prior, there was not a Conservative government. The point is that this issue takes more than one level of government to address it. That is the reason we have the minister responsible for public safety saying that we are going to have a summit. The Conservatives are howling, “just a summit”. They just discovered the issue, and we already said we are going to have a summit. We are bringing experts in. There is going to be dialogue, and things are going to be brought to the table. We are not only taking budgetary measures in the amount of tens of millions to look into how we can get at organized crime and organized gangs but also looking at legislative measures and possibly regulations that could be changed. We want to take a holistic approach in dealing with this issue. Unlike the Conservatives, who like to talk tough on crime, we believe that actions speak louder than words. We will continue to work with different stakeholders and to get the level of expertise to the table so that we will be in a better position to work with provinces and law enforcement agencies. As a national government, we would be in a position to see if we could do something legislatively or could do something through regulations, and perhaps there are other pockets where we could invest more to support this issue. That is ultimately what the Liberal government is doing. We are taking a progressive, holistic approach to make sure that the issue is dealt with, unlike Stephen Harper and the born-again Conservative right wing.

1139 words

Mr. Scot Davidson (York—Simcoe, CPC)

Feb/6/24 1:18:06 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I really think the member for Winnipeg North will have lots of time to practise his Stephen Harper lines when he is in opposition. We should not be fooled by the member's speech; the facts are what they are. Car theft is up 300%. Over 4,200 vehicles have been stolen in York Region. Canadians will not be fooled either. The NDP-Liberal government has spent 40% more on the federal public service for worse outcomes. If he went out and spoke with Canadians, he would tell them that their outcomes are worse. Mr. Speaker, is your life 40% better in terms of outcomes than it was? Could the member comment on the spending for worse results for Canadians?

122 words

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux

Feb/6/24 1:19:05 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, because of time restrictions, I was not able to continue to give my explanation about the Manitoba case. I can tell the member opposite that, at this point in time, Manitoba had the highest number of cars being stolen in any given year, more than the province of Ontario. I am not talking about per capita but the raw number of cars being stolen. Ultimately, what had the most positive impact was when law enforcement, the Province of Manitoba and Ottawa, to a certain degree, came together and tried to deal with the issue. At least today, Ottawa is recognizing that we need to bring people together in order to deal with this issue. Organized crime is more than just automobile theft. We recognize the importance of the issue. We are doing something, as opposed to the Conservatives, who heard we were having a summit and then decided it was an important issue.

155 words

Mr. Gord Johns (Courtenay—Alberni, NDP)

Feb/6/24 1:20:12 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives come forward today saying that one car stolen should equal a year in jail. That is not a policy. That is straight out of the books from a Texas governor, who failed in their policies in Texas. We know the Conservatives cut 1,100 jobs at the Canada Border Services Agency, in terms of officers on the front line. According to Mark Weber, the president of the Customs and Immigration Union, “We estimate that we need between 2,000 and 3,000 additional officers on the front line.” He also cited that, with the amount of money they spent on the ArriveCAN app, the scandal taking place right now, they could have hired 500 border agents. When is the government going to step it up when it comes to hiring officers at the border? Will it listen to the NDP proposal to require auto manufacturers to improve security features in the cars they sell? A memo we put forward today was shot down by the Conservatives, but this seems to be a common-sense solution to help stop car theft.

186 words

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux

Feb/6/24 1:21:22 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, it is interesting. The member referred to the well over 1,000 cuts in terms of Canada border control service officers. Not only have we, as a government, restored every one of those cuts, but we can add on another 800. As a government, we have provided supports from a budget perspective; we continue to look at ways to enhance and try to improve the system, whether through the budgetary measures that we just cited or legislative measures, in terms of working with provinces on the bail reform legislation we ultimately passed. The Government of Canada is committed to making our communities healthier and safer. We are taking the measures that are necessary and are prepared to work with other levels of government and stakeholders to do just that.

131 words

Ms. Elizabeth May (Saanich—Gulf Islands, GP)

Feb/6/24 1:22:41 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I wanted to ask the hon. parliamentary secretary about the logic behind mandatory minimums, which have been proven, on empirical evidence, not to hold the logic one would hope. They actually tend to work against reducing crime. One reason for this is that increasing the mandatory minimum would drive people toward cutting deals and plea bargains, instead of actually dealing with matters or giving judges the discretion to increase the sentencing where they think it is appropriate.

79 words

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux

Feb/6/24 1:23:17 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, given the complexities of the pros and cons of minimum sentencing, in certain situations, I believe that having minimal sentences can be an effective tool for our judicial system.

31 words

Mr. Dane Lloyd (Sturgeon River—Parkland, CPC)

Feb/6/24 1:23:42 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-5

Mr. Speaker, at the outset, I would like to say that I will be splitting my time with my hon. colleague from Flamborough—Glanbrook. I am pleased to rise today on this very important debate. Canadians may wonder what Canada's top exports and fastest-growing exports are. They might think about oil and gas, minerals or aerospace parts. However, they would be surprised to learn that one of Canada's fastest-growing exports over the past few years has been stolen vehicles. Actually, this has been over the past eight years, under the Liberal government. This ongoing surge in auto thefts is a direct consequence of a weak justice system, the absence of proper law enforcement and a border so porous that the number of vehicles getting through reached over 100,000 vehicles in 2022 alone. In other words, it is a legacy of the current Liberal government. I am proud to rise to speak to this issue and to put forward a common-sense Conservative plan to deal with these auto thefts, because that is what the hard-working people in Sturgeon River—Parkland and across this country deserve. They deserve a real plan that would provide tangible results, put these repeat offenders behind bars, and keep our vehicles in our driveways and off container ships going abroad. This is not just an issue of young kids taking a vehicle out for a joyride or stealing a vehicle just to make a few bucks. Our country is facing an industrial-level organized crime problem. Let us go over some of the key facts. As we speak, on average, a vehicle is stolen every six minutes in Canada; therefore, in the time that we have been debating here today, dozens of Canadians have had their vehicles stolen from their driveways and places of work. The trend is clear: In 2018, the insurance industry paid out $400 million in stolen vehicle claims, and since then, this number has grown drastically. In 2021, it reached $700 million in claims; in 2022, which is the latest year we have the insurance statistics for, the insurance industry paid out an unprecedented $1.2 billion in claims on stolen vehicles. After eight years of the current government's soft-on-crime agenda, car thefts have tripled in Toronto and doubled in Montreal. While big cities have seen the largest increases in recent years, this wave of crime is affecting all Canadians across the country, including those living in western Canada and rural Canada, where vehicles being stolen from farms is a common story that I hear. F-350s are vehicles that are often stolen. In fact, over the Christmas break, I woke up at seven o'clock in the morning, when people were getting up, getting dressed and getting ready to go to work. I looked out the window, and I saw an F-350 parked outside my house. There were people in hoodies trying to steal it. Kids were getting up and getting ready to go to school at that time in some of our rural communities, and there were people still out and trying to steal those cars. It is shocking and unacceptable. This is not just a temporary crime wave. This is a sophisticated, industrial-level organized crime operation that requires our immediate attention. This is not a new issue; we faced it before, in the early 1990s. Car thefts inspired many Hollywood-level movies, such as The Fast and the Furious and Gone in 60 Seconds. However, with better technologies, better law enforcement and tougher sentences, we saw a significant decline in the number of auto thefts. I was actually pulling up the statistics on this, and it is very interesting. From 2004 to 2015, the number of auto thefts reported to police in Canada went down by 61%. What happened between 2004 and 2015? We had a tough-on-crime Conservative government that put forward tangible measures to get tough on repeat offenders who were stealing vehicles, with mandatory minimum sentences and with investments in law enforcement to crack down on crime. That is a record I am very proud of. It is not a record that the current government can say it replicates; during the time that it has been in power, we have seen a tripling of stolen vehicles from Toronto, a doubling from Montreal and an overall 34% increase in the country. The trend was broken by the Liberal government, and this is directly due to its policies. It has become relatively easy to smuggle a vehicle out of the country after it has been stolen. The dedicated men and women of the CBSA are doing their very best, but they are facing a capacity problem, with an estimated five CBSA agents at the port of Montreal. About a year ago, CBSA union officials came to the public safety committee. They talked about some of the measures they have in place so that people can report auto thefts and suspicious activities at the port. It is the 21st century. Do members know what measures the government has at the ports so that people can report when they see suspicious threats? It has a hotline telephone on the wall, so if people see something, they can call somebody to deal with it. It is 2024. We need new and better technologies to ensure that we have the tools we need to stop these containers with our vehicles from leaving our ports. Once these stolen vehicles leave Canada, they are destined for markets far away, in Africa and the Middle East. As a result of our weak enforcement, Canada is becoming what some industry experts are calling a “donor country” for stolen vehicles. Usually, it is a good thing to be a donor, but not when we are talking about stolen vehicles. The revenue generated from this trade is being used to finance drug trafficking, illegal arms trafficking, human trafficking and even terrorism. Just a couple of weeks ago, Italian authorities intercepted a vessel with 251 stolen Canadian vehicles on it; they were bound for sale in the Middle East. Cars with Canadian licence plates have been a common sight on the streets of Accra, the capital of Ghana. In fact, the flood of Canadians' stolen vehicles entering that country has led the Ghanaian government to beg the Canadian government to do more to prevent our vehicles from leaving our country, because this is affecting its domestic market. This is not just a Canadian issue; it is becoming an international issue. It is an embarrassment for our country. It is not only a crime problem but also an economic problem, with $1.2 billion in insurance payouts made. Do members think the insurance companies are just going to eat that cost? That means Canadian families are paying an estimated $500 in increased premiums. The reports coming out of MNP talk about how many Canadians are living paycheque to paycheque or are less than $200 away from insolvency. Who can afford $500 more for insurance premiums just to pay for the vehicle people are taking to work? It is not just the case for the people who are driving a Toyota Highlander, a Lexus or the other vehicles that are often being stolen; everyone is paying for it. The costs are being distributed to everyone, no matter what vehicle they have. This is unacceptable. We know what the problem is. The government talks about having a summit, but the problem has been clear for years: We have a government with soft-on-crime policies that have unleashed a torrent of repeat violent offenders on our streets. Members might ask why I am calling them violent offenders. I saw a left-wing commentator online on what is now X, formerly known as Twitter, asking why we are putting people in jail for victimless crimes. This is not a victimless crime. In the few stories that I have seen where people have been stopped in stolen vehicles, do members know what charges most often accompanied the stolen vehicle charge? They were weapons, firearms and drug possession charges. There was a heroic job done by RCMP officers just west of Stony Plain a few days ago. A stolen vehicle went through town with five people in it. They deployed a tire device to pop the tires. When they stopped the vehicle, they found methamphetamine, cocaine and loaded weapons. Two of the five people charged were released the very same day. This is unacceptable. These people do not carry guns because they are going out hunting or carry drugs just because; they are carrying these things because they intend to sell them or because they intend to commit violence if they are confronted. Since 2015, the crisis has come to a point where Canadians will no longer accept inaction from the Liberal government. They will no longer accept bills such as Bill C-5, allowing house arrest for the people who are committing these crimes. Canadians will no longer accept a government that lets repeat offenders back on the streets over and over again, with bail, not jail, to victimize our families. I know that, under our Conservative government, we will bring in mandatory minimum sentences. We will provide the resources to law enforcement to get these criminals behind bars and disrupt organized crime. This will keep the criminals from sending our stolen vehicles abroad and using that money to finance the terrorism and firearms trafficking being used to commit violence on our streets or the drugs that are victimizing families and addicts who need treatment. We will not accept this. That is our common-sense plan, and we are going to do it.

1625 words

Mr. Ken Hardie (Fleetwood—Port Kells, Lib.)

Feb/6/24 1:34:09 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the issue of auto theft, having worked for the public auto insurer in B.C., but there are statistics that show, in fact, that auto thefts in B.C. are down quite substantially from where they were five years ago. I wonder whether the member could reflect on what might be the cause, because the same laws are in effect. If one believes it is “catch and release”, that has been in effect there too for quite a long time, even in the Stephen Harper days. What is different in B.C. and maybe in Manitoba and Saskatchewan, and in fact worse, than in all other jurisdictions?

113 words

Mr. Dane Lloyd

Feb/6/24 1:34:49 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, looking at the statistics, there are increases or decreases in different jurisdictions. One can cherry-pick certain jurisdictions and say, “This jurisdiction is seeing a lower rate; therefore our government's policies must be successful.” However, when we look at the aggregate across the country, there has been a 34% increase. This increase has been most stark in provinces like Ontario and Quebec. Why is that? It is because the port of Montreal has become such a conduit for getting stolen vehicles abroad. It is because of the current government, which has a responsibility for the ports and a responsibility to protect our borders, that we have seen the port of Montreal become such a conduit for stolen vehicles. That is why we are seeing a commensurate increase in Ontario and Quebec. However, it is not just an Ontario and Quebec issue. In Alberta, vehicles have been stolen for many years. F-350s are being re-vinned and sent down to the United States. They are being sent to chop shops. This is a cross-Canada issue, and we cannot neglect any part of the country with our response.

193 words

Ms. Kristina Michaud (Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, BQ)

Feb/6/24 1:35:56 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I know that my colleague is very familiar with this file. He said that criminal groups are using this money to fund other criminal activities, including terrorism. Earlier I was talking about human trafficking and illegal arms trafficking. He says that the Conservative Party has a plan for auto theft and that it involves harsher sentences. However, what is his party's plan to go after the heads of these big criminal networks? Obviously we think of the car thieves, those who commit the crime in the here and now. Often they are people who do not have a criminal record. Some are even minors. We have seen people under 18 committing these crimes in Toronto and bringing the cars to Montreal. Yes, I think it is important to increase certain sentences, but it is also important to go after the heads of these criminal groups. What is his party's plan for that?

156 words

Mr. Dane Lloyd

Feb/6/24 1:36:59 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I much appreciate being with my hon. colleague on the public safety committee on this issue. I found, actually, quite the opposite: oftentimes the people caught with stolen vehicles do have very lengthy criminal records. In fact some of them are even out on bail and are supposed to be on house arrest when they are conducting these crimes. They are repeat offenders. I do appreciate what the member is talking about. How do we go after the big guys? These criminal organizations are very sophisticated. They use multiple middlemen to prevent the big players from being hit. We obviously have to go after some of the big players, but we also have to remove their frontline soldiers from the streets, which makes it harder for them to recruit new people to come out to commit the crimes. We also have to stop the vehicles from leaving the ports in the first place. If we make it more difficult, because it is very easy today to get these vehicles out of Canada, it is going to discourage criminals from engaging in this activity. It is is going to discourage them from bringing their immense resources to bear on getting vehicles out of Canada. We need to be tough on the border. We need to get the people who are committing the crimes off the street so we can protect our communities.

233 words

Mr. Damien Kurek (Battle River—Crowfoot, CPC)

Feb/6/24 1:38:29 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I would ask specifically whether the hon. member could comment on what seems to be the rapid increase in not being able to effectively catch vehicles in the process of being stolen. I know there have been high-profile cases. I have heard that it has been the case in Alberta as well that somebody will put an air tag in the vehicle and be able to follow it, yet law enforcement does not seem to either have the resources or be able to get the vehicle before it is shipped overseas.

94 words

Mr. Dane Lloyd

Feb/6/24 1:39:06 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I actually did have a positive interaction, as much as it could be positive, when a vehicle of mine was stolen. I had a subscription for technology that allowed me to track the vehicle. I called the police, and they were able to locate the vehicle fairly quickly. The vehicle was in a neighbourhood to cool off so the thieves could check to see whether it was being tracked or not. Obviously, criminals know this technology is being used. They rip the electronics out of vehicles to prevent them from being used, but there is a technological solution that could really help. We need to not only get tough on the criminals but also to make it clear that we need to use all the technological tools we have available to tackle this very difficult issue.

138 words

Mr. Dan Muys (Flamborough—Glanbrook, CPC)

Feb/6/24 1:39:59 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-5

Mr. Speaker, I will start with a couple of headlines that dominated the radio and the online and social media news in my home community this past weekend. They really underscore the debate we are having today. The first is “Gun-wielding men forcefully entered Dundas home, stole two luxury cars: Hamilton police”. The second is “High-end vehicles stolen in ‘targeted’ home invasion in Hamilton, Ont.”. Those are just a couple. Twenty years ago, I lived on the street where this particular crime took place on Friday night. It is a few houses down from where I used to live. It was shocking to hear that this was taking place. My grandparents lived on that same street when I grew up. I talked to one of the neighbours yesterday, and people on Hopkins Court now live in fear. There were other vehicles at the targeted residence that the thieves did not get on Friday night, and the residents are now fearful the thieves will be back because they were a target. This is, as my colleagues have mentioned, a sophisticated gang operation that is taking place; it is an organized crime operation. That is the crux of the problem. They will be back because federal enforcement and federal prevention actions are woefully inadequate. Less than 24 hours later, I received a text from my neighbour on an unrelated incident, but one of similar concern. There was a vehicle prowling around his workshop building and garage. It had to go around a steel barrier, through the grass and across a hill in order to get there. Alarmed by what he was seeing take place in the early hours of Sunday morning, my neighbour followed the vehicle and was able to get part of the licence plate number and report it to Hamilton Police Service. These are just two recent incidents that are not isolated at all but are part of an epidemic. I have talked to a number of constituents who have been victims of vehicle theft. One couple was able to trace their vehicle that was stolen from their driveway in Waterdown to Montreal. This was the second vehicle stolen from the couple's driveway. Waterdown is a bedroom community in the greater Toronto and Hamilton area. The couple actually walked by the person they believe was the criminal responsible on the street of Montreal near the port. Eerily, the individual gave them a knowing glance. These are incidents we are hearing about. The couple also heard that as part of this organized crime network, groups are paid thousands of dollars per night just to scope out vehicles in driveways and locations that will be targeted in the coming nights. Just to spot vehicles, they are getting thousands of dollars. We are talking about millions of dollars in criminal activity. Truck and auto thefts are in not just my community; they are across the GTA. There have been a number of local headlines about this across Niagara, Waterloo Region, southern Ontario and, in fact, across the country. We know that local law enforcement is hamstrung because it needs the federal government to act. The Criminal Code, the RCMP, CBSA and certainly federal ports are all matters of federation jurisdiction. In order to puts the brakes on auto theft by organized crime, we need the federal government to act. At the transport committee, which I am privileged to sit on, there was a Conservative motion put forward today to look specifically at what is going on at the port of Montreal. Unfortunately, it was voted down by the Liberals and the NDP, the cover-up coalition working together. They do not have any interest in getting to the bottom of this. It is costing all of us, even those people fortunate enough not to have had a vehicle stolen, because we know there has been $1.2 billion in insurance payouts for stolen vehicles; this is causing an increase in insurance premiums, up 25% in some cases in Ontario. These are brazen acts of theft and violence, and they are affecting people in our communities. In 2022 alone there were a staggering 9,600 motor vehicles stolen from the GTA. This leaves families traumatized and financially burdened. The impact goes far beyond the immediate victims; it undermines the fabric of our society. It is eroding the trust and confidence in our institutions and is contributing to a pervasive sense of insecurity. The repercussions are felt not only in the emotional toll exacted on individuals and families but also in the economic consequences borne by our communities as a whole. One of the most concerning aspects of this crisis is the failure of federal ports to stem the tide of stolen vehicles leaving our shores. These cars and trucks, pilfered from the streets of the GTHA, are effortlessly smuggled into containers, loaded onto trains and illegally shipped out of the country, primarily via the port of Montreal. Ironically, that port is in the backyard of the Minister of Transport. In December I asked the CBSA, via an Order Paper question, how many vehicles it had intercepted at the port of Montreal. Despite the exponential rise in auto thefts that we have seen, over 300% in the GTA since the Liberal government took office in 2015, the number of vehicles intercepted at the port of Montreal remains stagnant, year over year, at somewhere between 1,000 and 1,100. We know that 105,000 vehicles were stolen in Canada in a year. We are talking about fewer than 1% being retrieved. We know that the technology exists, through X-ray scanners, to scan more of the containers and actually track the vehicles down. However, there is just one scanner right now at the port of Montreal, and it does not work half of the time. That is insufficient. As my colleague mentioned, there are African countries begging the Government of Canada to take action on this issue. The action is not being taken, and that is cause for concern. Like so many things in Canada, this is something that should not be happening. It should not be this way. Even when Canadians resort to practical measures like putting Apple AirTags in their vehicles, recovery is far from guaranteed. Railway agents often refuse to inspect cargo already en route to the ports, and there are inadequate resources at the ports for inspection; therefore there is a highway facilitating this. The root cause is the soft-on-crime approach by the Liberal-NDP government, with bills like Bill C-75 and BIll C-5 that have emboldened criminals to be repeat offenders. They are often released on bail within hours of arrest and go on to commit further crimes. Even after being convicted, these individuals are often granted house arrest, which is really insufficient. We say, “Enough is enough.” Common-sense Conservatives are committed to really hitting the brakes on car theft and restoring the sense of security to our communities. The Leader of the Opposition has put forward a common-sense plan that includes a number of measures, such as mandatory prison sentences, ending house arrest for convicted car thieves, tougher sentencing for those crimes that are gang-related and have an organized crime element, and, of course, jail, not bail for repeat offenders and repeat violent offenders, as we saw in the examples I brought up from my community this past weekend. In addition to that, we need to address what is happening at the ports. We need more CBSA officers. Right now there are only five at the port of Montreal. We need to cut the waste on consultants at CBSA and invest in enforcement at the ports. We also need to have more scanners that could actually address the issue. There is some urgency now. Violent crime is up across the country. What the Liberal government has proposed is a summit: more convening and fewer results. Common-sense Conservatives have a plan to axe the tax, build the homes, fix the budget and stop the crime. Indeed, we are going to stop crime. We are going to slam the brakes on auto theft. We will restore law and order. We will bring home safer streets to Canadians from coast to coast.

1389 words

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)

Feb/6/24 1:49:31 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I wonder whether my colleague across the way would agree with me that the Leader of the Conservative Party made a big mistake when Conservatives slashed the funding to law enforcement agencies while he sat around the cabinet table. Would the member indicate whether the Leader of the Conservative Party made a mistake by cutting real jobs from the Canada Border Services Agency? We are talking about well over 1,000 jobs. Would the member not agree that supporting additional funds and making sure that there were more people working in that area would have been better then? Some people might suggest he was part of the problem.

110 words

Mr. Dan Muys

Feb/6/24 1:50:22 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for Winnipeg North for his revisionist history. Crime was actually down during the previous Conservative government. We have seen an exponential rise in the auto thefts in particular, but violent crime is up 39%. We have the highest murder rates in 30 years under the soft-on-crime policies of the government. We have seen this exponential rise in auto thefts impacting people in our communities. Cars are stolen at gunpoint, and that is alarming in every sense. We are putting forward a very practical plan to actually get this issue resolved, not just words, talks and summits among bureaucrats.

107 words

Ms. Marilyn Gladu (Sarnia—Lambton, CPC)

Feb/6/24 1:51:14 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-5

Mr. Speaker, I was really surprised to see the Liberals issue a press announcement that talked about the huge increase in car theft since they were elected in 2015. It is interesting that they did nothing about the problem, other than make it worse with Bill C-75 and Bill C-5, until we started raising the issue. Now the Liberals' answer is a meeting. Would the member agree that this is simply not enough?

75 words

Mr. Dan Muys

Feb/6/24 1:51:47 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, Sarnia—Lambton is also a border community that sees a lot of this criminal activity that is happening across the border. The member is exactly right. It was actually hilarious. The government press release announced the increase that we have seen, 300% in the greater Toronto area and over 100% in Ottawa and Montreal, and talked about this for some time. I have certainly been hearing about it from constituents the entire two years I have been a member of this place. We have been raising this. As I mentioned, I put forward an Order Paper question to ask for specific numbers of what was being checked at the Port of Montreal, and clearly that was insufficient. We raised this as a motion at the transportation committee today and it was voted down by the cover-up coalition. More talk by politicians and bureaucrats and more hot air are not going to solve this problem; action is.

160 words

SoVote

House Hansard - 276