SoVote

Mr. Alistair MacGregor (Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, NDP)

Feb/6/24 3:45:15 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I was wondering whether my colleague across the way could put today's Conservative motion in the context of two things: first of all, the massive cuts to the Canada Border Services Agency in 2012 by the previous Harper government and, second, the December votes of the supplementary estimates, in which the Conservatives voted against important line item spending for both the RCMP and the Canada Border Services Agency.

71 words

Mr. Francesco Sorbara

Feb/6/24 3:45:42 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it points to a certain level of hypocrisy. When the Conservatives were in power, they did cut over $400 to $500 million for CBSA frontline officers. Recently, on the supplementary estimates, they voted against funding for law enforcement agencies and the brave men and women who keep our communities safe. Whether it is in my hometown of Prince Rupert, where there is an RCMP detachment, or across this country, we hear again and again that the Conservatives are saying no to helping our frontline officers do their job day in and day out.

95 words

Ms. Julie Dabrusin

Feb/6/24 3:46:29 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. It is really hard to be listening to the debate right now with the level of noise from the Conservative bench. It is like a coffee chat over there while we are trying to do some important work. I would ask them to please listen.

54 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès)

Feb/6/24 3:46:39 p.m.
Watch

I take notice. I called the House to order twice during the hon. member's speech. I remind members to be respectful of one another when someone is speaking. The hon. Leader of the Opposition.

35 words

Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Leader of the Opposition, CPC)

Feb/6/24 3:46:51 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-5

Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles. After eight years in power, this Prime Minister is not worth the cost, he is not worth the crime and he is not worth the cost of crime. After eight years with this Prime Minister in power, everything costs more, work no longer pays, housing costs have doubled, and crime, chaos, drugs and disorder are out of control. I want to give an example from a CTV article. A 26-year-old man is facing a slew of charges filed by police officers in Bradford. Police say the suspect was arrested for stealing a vehicle at around 11 p.m. but was more or less automatically released on bail. That morning, he was arrested again at 4:30 a.m. for another theft. There will be a bail hearing. He will likely be released a second time to commit a third theft in less than 24 hours. We are hearing these sorts of stories after eight years of this Prime Minister because Bill C-75 gives automatic parole to chronic auto thieves. Even the bail reform the government presented under pressure from the Conservatives did not address auto theft. As a result, these same criminals can continue to commit hundreds of crimes, even if they are caught. It is no big deal if they are found guilty, because, under Bill C-5, they can serve their sentence in their living room, meaning they can watch Netflix or play a game while they wait to go out and steal another vehicle. That is why, after eight years of this Prime Minister, auto theft is up 300% in Toronto, 100% in Ottawa and Montreal and 100% in New Brunswick. The government is releasing recidivists who terrorize our streets and then it helps them send stolen goods around the world to fund terrorism and organized crime. The ports are wide open to criminals. Even though the Prime Minister has spent billions of dollars on bureaucracy, we see that the Port of Montreal has only five border officers to inspect more than 500,000 containers. Less than 1% of the containers are inspected. They have a scanner that barely works. It is easy to see why theft has massively increased. Even after all of these increases, we see that the number of containers being intercepted is the same as it was eight years ago. There is more theft, more illegal exports, but more containers are not being intercepted. That does not make sense. We did exactly the opposite when we formed the government: We cut the number of car thefts in half. That is a massive reduction that makes me proud. The Prime Minister likes to point out the fact that we did that by cutting costs. It is true, we cut costs and reduced crime at the same time. That is a good thing, a win-win, as the member for Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles would say. Today, I continued to present our common-sense plan. First, we will bring in three years of jail for three stolen cars. Second, we will end house arrest. Third, we will bring in harsher penalties for theft tied to organized crime. Finally, we will strengthen our ports. We will do this by hiring 75 border officers to carry out inspections at Canada's four largest ports, namely, Vancouver, Halifax, Prince Rupert and, of course, Montreal. They will be able to use new scanners that can look into the boxes to see if they contain stolen goods. Each of those 24 scanners will be able to scan one million containers a year. How are we going to pay for that? With a common-sense approach, dollar for dollar. We are going to cut $165 million from the budget for external management consultants. We are going to get rid of consultants and put the money into boots on the ground and box scanners. It is really very simple. We have a common-sense plan to stop auto theft by strengthening our ports and keeping thieves behind bars. That is just common sense. After eight years, the Prime Minister is not worth the cost. After eight years, he is not worth the crime. After eight years, he is not worth the cost of crime. Crime is costly, because after eight years of the Prime Minister, we are paying $1 billion in higher insurance premiums to pay for the stolen cars. In Ontario, that adds $120 to the insurance bill of every family that has a car. Let me tell the story that was on CTV News on December 27: A 26-year-old man faces a slew of charges after police arrested him twice less than six hours apart for alleged crimes in Bradford and Innisfil. Police said he was caught stealing a car at 11:00 p.m. on Sunday. They arrested and released him, and then he was arrested at 4:30 a.m. the very next morning. That was five hours after his last crime. This is the new normal after eight years of the Prime Minister and his catch-and-release Bill C-75, which forced police to arrest the same 40 offenders 6,000 times in Vancouver and contributed to a 300% increase in auto theft in Toronto, 100% in Ottawa and Montreal, and over 100% in New Brunswick. It is crime, chaos, drugs and disorder. If these repeat career car thieves are actually convicted, they do not have to worry about that either, because under the Prime Minister's Bill C-5, which has the full support of the NDP, they will have house arrest, meaning they can watch Netflix or play a game of Grand Theft Auto in their living room. Then they can get up whenever they say they need a few more bucks to fill their pockets, open the front door, walk out onto the street and steal another car. That car then goes to the port and is gone. Our common-sense plan is very straightforward. We are going to get rid of house arrest for career car thieves. We are going bring in jail and not bail for people who have long rap sheets. We are going to bring in a mandatory three years' jail for three cars stolen. We are going to increase penalties if the stolen car was related to organized crime. Then, we are going to reinforce our ports. I am going to cut $165 million that we are now giving to management consultants, because if the managers over at CBSA cannot manage, they should not be managing; they should be fired. We will fire the management consultants, and we will put that money, $135 million of it, into hiring 75 border agents who will use 24 new scanners that are able to scan a million shipping containers every year at our four biggest ports. If a stolen car is in there and there is a phony claim on the manifest, the scanner will show it. If someone calls saying, “Look out for my stolen car,” the scanner will catch it. The box can be put aside. The car can be put back in the hands of the rightful owner. In other words, our common-sense plan is to put boots on the ground, to scan the boxes and to put the career car thieves in jail. Our common-sense plan is to stop the crime and bring home safe streets. It is the common sense of the common people, united for our common home.

1273 words

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

Feb/6/24 3:57:05 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, a few days ago this was not even an issue for the leader of the Conservative Party, but less than an hour ago, what we witnessed was the Conservative Party of Canada vote against speaking as one voice in favour of the Canada-Ukraine trade agreement. I believe that the Conservative Party has done a great disservice to Ukraine and the whole idea of solidarity with Ukraine that has taken form around the world. I and so many other Canadians would like to understand the real reason the Conservative leader today voted against the Canada-Ukraine trade agreement. How does he justify his actions today?

107 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès)

Feb/6/24 3:57:53 p.m.
Watch

I have to remind the hon. member to be relevant to the speech the hon. Leader of the Opposition made. The hon. Leader of the Opposition.

26 words

Hon. Pierre Poilievre

Feb/6/24 3:58:05 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, he knows it is not relevant and he does not care, because he does not care about Ukraine. He cares about using Ukrainians to distract from the car-theft crisis that his boss, the Prime Minister, has caused. The Prime Minister could not care less about Ukraine or any of the other distractions he brings up. He does it because he knows he cannot run on his miserable track record of doubling the cost of housing, sending a record-smashing two million people to food banks, quadrupling the carbon tax, leading to a 300% car-theft increase in just eight years in Toronto, and giving Halifax 30 homeless encampments. This kind of chaos and misery is a record no one wants.

123 words

Mr. Martin Champoux (Drummond, BQ)

Feb/6/24 3:58:56 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, as I said earlier, the Bloc Québécois agrees with quite a few aspects of this motion. I also find it very interesting because it appears to address an issue of mutual concern today to the Liberals and the Conservatives. I like that. The Liberals are organizing a summit on auto theft. These thefts are a scourge, especially given the figures released in recent weeks. It is appalling, and we must take action. I could not agree more. The Conservatives have made it the topic of their opposition day today. I think it is wonderful to finally see some agreement on the issues we are called on to debate in this place. Since the Conservatives are proposing solutions and the Liberals are organizing a summit on Thursday, I would like to ask the Leader of the Opposition whether he intends to raise these representations at the Thursday summit to gain support for them. Will he attend?

161 words

Hon. Pierre Poilievre

Feb/6/24 3:59:51 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-5

Madam Speaker, yes, I am going. I was not invited, but I will go anyway and share my common-sense ideas. I hope that, after eight years, they will learn, because I was part of the government that managed to reduce auto theft by 50% while reducing the cost of bureaucracy at the Canada Border Services Agency. The Bloc voted in favour of Bill C-5, which allows sentences to be served at home, thereby enabling more crime. They voted in favour of Bill C-75, which allows for the automatic release of repeat car thieves. The Bloc also supports wasting money going after sport shooters and hunters, which takes money away from our border forces. The Bloc supports all public safety policies. It makes no sense. Only the Conservative Party makes sense for Quebeckers.

135 words

Ms. Lori Idlout (Nunavut, NDP)

Feb/6/24 4:00:57 p.m.
Watch

Uqaqtittiji, the NDP, I think, are quite well-known for trying to work with all parties to get things done, and we did try to work with the Conservative Party on this motion. Why did the Conservatives vote against our amendments, for example, requiring auto manufacturers to improve security features in the cars they sell, and secondly, to put in place tough, new measures to crack down on organized crime and money laundering linked to auto thefts?

77 words

Hon. Pierre Poilievre

Feb/6/24 4:01:32 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the member voted against her constituents by supporting the Prime Minister's ban on law-abiding, licensed, trained and tested firearms owners. She voted with her party to attack first nations hunters and other legitimate, law-abiding firearms owners, instead of going after the real criminals. She, like the Prime Minister, would take money away from border security and use it to harass licensed, law-abiding firearms owners in her own riding. That is the shameful record of the NDP. Only the common-sense Conservatives will respect and honour our hunters, our anglers and our sport shooters and go after real criminals.

104 words

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

Feb/6/24 4:02:30 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am rising on a point of order. There have been discussions among the parties and, if you seek it, I think you will find unanimous consent to adopt the following motion. I move: That, notwithstanding any standing order or usual practice of the House, during the debate pursuant to Standing Order 66 on Motion No. 49 to concur in the 10th report of the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food, no quorum calls, dilatory motions or requests for unanimous consent shall be received by the Chair and at the conclusion of the time provided for debate or when no member rises to speak, whichever is earlier, all questions necessary to dispose of the motions be deemed put and a recorded division deemed requested and deferred pursuant to Standing Order 66.

134 words

All Topics

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès)

Feb/6/24 4:03:14 p.m.
Watch

All those opposed to the hon. member's moving the motion will please say nay. It is agreed. The House has heard the terms of the motion. All those opposed to the motion will please say nay.

37 words

All Topics

Mr. Pierre Paul-Hus (Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, CPC)

Feb/6/24 4:03:34 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-5 Bill C-325

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to speak to our opposition motion and a very serious subject. Auto theft is a problem that is happening right now, and I do not know whether my colleagues are aware of this, but Canada has the highest rate of auto theft in the world. We are the number one exporter of stolen vehicles. Is that something we want to see? No, not at all. It is important to understand that auto theft is a big deal. It has gone up by 34% in Canada since this Prime Minister and his government came to power. Even worse, it has gone up by 300% in Toronto. In Montreal and the Ottawa-Gatineau region, it has gone up by more than 100%. It is up by 120% in New Brunswick and 122% overall in Ontario. One of the reasons we are seeing these numbers is that inflation has driven up the price of cars. Compared to last year, cars are worth 20% more. They are very attractive items. Nowadays, we are no longer talking about cars that were worth $15,000 or $20,000 back in the day. They now cost $45,000 on average. The most desirable cars are in the $60,000 to $70,000 range. This means someone can steal a car and resell it for more than $100,000, even as much as $120,000, abroad. It is a very attractive market for organized crime and thieves. This is causing stress. People are stressed right now. When they wake up in the morning or go to the grocery store, they wonder whether their car will be where they left it. Things cannot go on like this. Theft has a financial impact too. Last year, insurance companies paid out $1 billion to settle claims by the owners of stolen cars. What comes next? All car owners end up paying more for insurance. Insurance companies have to cover their losses, so they raise premiums. Once again, in addition to inflation and rising rates everywhere, insurance premiums go up because auto theft is out of control. The solutions for controlling auto theft are not limitless. Some things are easy to do. The government is not being called out for nothing. Before I rose to speak, we heard from the Leader of the Opposition. For the past two days, he has been proposing concrete solutions to the problem. I would like to talk about the first two. First, there was Bill C‑5, which was enacted. We criticized it from the start. We made every possible and impossible representation to say that it does not work. Here is a concrete example: People are convicted, but instead of going to prison like they should, they get to stay at home. What do we think these people are doing? They think nothing of it; they are criminals. They unapologetically go out and commit more crimes. The other issue with Bill C-5 was minimum sentences. The government stood up and the justice minister said that the Conservatives were wrong. No, we are not wrong. Auto theft currently carries a six-month sentence. What we are saying, and we are not going too far, is that if the same person has stolen three cars and has been charged with three thefts, they should get a minimum of three years in jail. I think this is just common sense. When we talk about common sense, this is a perfect example. People are looking at this and wondering whether it is normal for a criminal to continue stealing with impunity, with no penalty other than to be sent home to watch Netflix. We said before that there was a problem with Bill C-5, and we are seeing it now. We are calling on the government to fix it and rework what was done with Bill C-5. Then there is Bill C-75, which was implemented by the Liberals and has led to people being arrested and released in the same day. At times, it happens that someone is arrested in the morning, their case is processed and, after a few hours, they are released and continue to commit crimes. It is a vicious cycle. We do not want to exaggerate; we know that very few people are doing that. However, here is a really incredible statistic. In Vancouver, 40 criminals were arrested 6,000 times in one year. That is 150 times each. It is the same 40 people. There is a small number of them, but they commit a lot of crimes. Basically, what we want to do is prevent these individuals from being released again and again and from committing crimes over and over. The repercussions of Bill C-75 are being felt everywhere. The same thing applies to the auto theft market. These people know that there are not really any consequences under the laws that have been put in place by the Liberals. They will get arrested, go to the station to deal with a little charge and then they will be back on the street. It does not bother them. It is as though they are not afraid, they have no fear. They know they will be able to carry on doing whatever they feel like doing. Let us talk about the technical aspect. Take, for example, the Port of Montreal. There are only five border agents to inspect the some 580,000 containers that leave the port each year, and they only have one scanner. I had the opportunity to visit the facilities there, and I saw that this big arch-shaped scanner does not always work and it is not really effective. Sooner or later, the port is going to need effective state-of-the-art equipment to get the job done right. I want to come back to our Liberal friends. What have they being doing in the meantime, over the past several years? The Prime Minister wasted $15 million on management consultants for the CBSA. That was useless. He also spent $54 million on the failed ArriveCAN app, and the RCMP is even investigating that contract. What is more, the Liberals did not spend the $117 million that was approved by Parliament. It is much like the support for Ukraine. Our colleagues like to talk to us about Ukraine. What is being done with the $406 million we voted on and was announced with great fanfare to buy anti-aircraft systems for Ukraine? Absolutely nothing has been done about it in a year. What is happening with the 83,000 decommissioned air-to-surface missiles that are warehoused in Manitoba? As Conservatives, we said they need to be given to Ukraine. Ukraine sent a letter asking for them. We said we needed to send them. This is war, it is urgent, but, no, they are asleep across the way. That is another file. The fact is that the Liberals are good at making accusations, but today we are here to work on things that are happening here, in Canada, things for which immediate action is needed and expected. What we are asking for is not complicated. As I said earlier, there is the legislation stemming from Bill C‑5. There is a way to fix at least that part of that law, which actually covers many types of crimes. I introduced Bill C‑325, which would fix the problems in that law. Obviously, it was not accepted by the Liberals or the NDP. I thank my friends in the Bloc Québécois who understood me and supported me on this. What we are asking for today has to do specifically with auto theft. There is a way to amend the law to deter crime. First, we need to actually incarcerate criminals. More importantly, we need to discourage those who are considering becoming car thieves. Those are some of the things that we need to do. People will see that and think to themselves that it is better not to get involved in auto theft. I was saying earlier that the vehicles are worth tens of thousands of dollars. Auto theft benefits organized crime and those on the other side of the ocean who buy the vehicles, but the thieves themselves are not paid very well, even though they are the ones who are taking all the risks. If we were to target them, to make young people understand that it is not a good idea to enter a life of crime because they will end up in prison, then that would be more effective than what is currently being done. The Conservatives get it. The Liberals did not do it, but when we take power, we are going to remove the right to house arrest. There will be no more Netflix sentences. We are going to create a new aggravating circumstance when the offence of motor vehicle theft is committed for the benefit of organized crime. This is important, because we must stop encouraging organized crime, and that starts with tackling the root cause. We will repeal the arrest and release rules in Bill C-75 to ensure that repeat offenders are jailed and not released on bail. We will fire the useless management consultants at CBSA and take that money to properly equip federal ports. We will invest in state-of-the-art X-ray equipment to enable rapid scanning of containers at our major ports in Vancouver, Montreal, Prince Rupert and Halifax. A total of 24 scanners will be purchased. Canada's four largest ports have a combined total of 12 terminals that handle container shipping. All of these terminals allow for goods to be transported by truck and rail, and each requires its own scanner and operator. The total cost for the 24 scanners is $55 million, with an ongoing service agreement of $300,000 per scanner, or $7.2 million per year. Let us talk about spending. Two days ago, our leader presented very clear proposals. He demonstrated how a Conservative government might make “investments”, as the Liberals like to say. Well, it takes money to do that. We have solutions for finding wasteful spending. We will be able to recover that money and invest it in immediate needs to ensure the safety of Canadians and put an end to auto theft and the too-easy shipping of stolen cars to the rest of the world.

1756 words

Mr. Wayne Long (Saint John—Rothesay, Lib.)

Feb/6/24 4:13:54 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I had a meeting recently in my riding of Saint John—Rothesay with CBSA officers and I was shocked to learn that in 2011-12, the party opposite cut almost 1,100 jobs. That would be like the mayor of Saint John cutting hundreds of jobs out of the police force and then wondering why crime went up. The Conservatives were also going to cut another 400 jobs if they had been re-elected in 2015. As of 2022-23, we have restored every single job cut by the Conservatives and have added an additional 884, getting more boots on the ground to protect our borders. I am wondering if the member opposite could explain the reason for the cuts and if he understands that those cuts resulted in the situation we have today.

137 words

Mr. Pierre Paul-Hus

Feb/6/24 4:15:01 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I see that is the question of the day and I will answer it with a question. Why, under the Conservative government, did auto theft go down by 50%? Why were there no problems at the border? Why did we not need resources from the Border Services Agency to go to Roxham Road, for example, after the Prime Minister's famous tweet that invited everyone to enter Canada? The Liberals created these situations by relaxing the Criminal Code, by showing criminals how easy it was to do whatever they wanted and by inviting people to enter Canada by Roxham Road. Obviously that required a lot more resources. What we are asking is for is a return to common sense. It is common sense to go back to a solid Criminal Code that will not tempt people to become criminals because they know they will end up in prison. Common sense will also lead to lower crime rates, which means there will be enough resources. For now, we have to fix the problem that has been created by eight years of this government.

184 words

Mr. Mario Beaulieu (La Pointe-de-l'Île, BQ)

Feb/6/24 4:15:54 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill S-9 Bill C-5

Madam Speaker, the Bloc Québécois agrees with the principle of the motion. We spoke out against rising auto theft at the port of Montreal before the Conservatives. We think they are taking liberties with the logic underpinning today's motion. They are taking shortcuts that distort reality. For example, claiming that Bill C‑5 is responsible for the increase in auto theft since 2015 is clearly false, because the bill came into force at the end of 2022, and 2022 was a record year for auto theft. They say they do not agree with the six-month minimum sentence for a third offence, but they are the ones who brought it in with section 333.1, which was added to Bill S‑9 in 2010 under the Conservative government. We do agree that the Port of Montreal and the Canada Border Services Agency do not have the resources to really check containers and do their job. I would like to know my colleague's thoughts on that.

175 words

Mr. Pierre Paul-Hus

Feb/6/24 4:17:01 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-5 Bill C-325

Madam Speaker, as I said in my speech, the Bloc Québécois members initially voted in favour of Bill C-5, but then realized that it was creating problems. They changed their minds and supported my bill, Bill C-325, and I thank them once again. As far as resources are concerned, the Leader of the Opposition made our case in Montreal this morning. I was with him. We went to the port of Montreal to make a clear, costed announcement that really showed how we could invest properly in equipping the ports and the Canada Border Services Agency. One part of the announcement was about purchasing equipment to scan containers, while at the same time, saving money by eliminating wasteful spending on consultants and things like ArriveCAN. Basically, all these kinds of expenses are completely useless.

140 words

Mr. Alistair MacGregor (Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, NDP)

Feb/6/24 4:17:49 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it seems, upon observation of the Conservative Party these days, that it is guided in its policy by two principles: one, it has to rhyme, which is why we see the words “axe” and “tax” and “bail” and “jail”, and, two, it has to fit on a bumper sticker. This is a fundamentally unserious way of dealing with a very serious issue, and I will give a clear example. My colleague asked a question of the Leader of the Opposition and instead of answering her directly, he switched tactics and attacked her because this is an unserious party. New Democrats put forward a very reasonable amendment to this motion and I wonder why the Conservatives do not think we should have a requirement that manufacturers improve the security on the vehicles they manufacture and why we should not have measures in place to crack down on organized crime and money laundering that is key to auto theft. Why will the Conservatives not agree to that very reasonable amendment to their motion?

181 words

SoVote

House Hansard - 276