SoVote

Mr. Frank Caputo (Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, CPC)

Feb/6/24 4:43:52 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is always a pleasure to rise on behalf of members from Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo. I will say this much. Sometimes, people say really funny things, and my colleague just said something very funny. Perhaps it was because the speech was just not that compelling. At the end of the day, the member has spoken all about what they have done about auto theft. I will remind him that Bill C-75 did not just raise the sentence, as though he is saying that we are targeting auto theft. It was actually two years less a day that it raised it on summary conviction. It raised every summary conviction to two years less a day. The Liberal government can say that it is targeting this time after time. There is an epidemic here, and I want to know this: Will the member admit, fundamentally, what police and citizens across the country are telling us, that there is a problem?

163 words

Mr. Chris Bittle

Feb/6/24 4:44:54 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I cannot believe that the hon. member is criticizing us for increasing the summary conviction penalty across the board in the Criminal Code. That is their criticism that he wants repealed. They say we are soft on crime. I am surprised that the member for Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, as a former prosecutor, would stand in the House and talk about making it easier on criminals. We cannot make this up, but he just gets up. He should go back to listening to his colleague and laughing in this place, because that was just a joke.

99 words

Mrs. Julie Vignola (Beauport—Limoilou, BQ)

Feb/6/24 4:45:43 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is possible to do two things at once. I will clarify my previous question to ensure the member understands. Obviously, consultation and coordination are essential when it comes to an issue as serious as auto theft, and crime in general. That said, there used to be preventative measures in place, but they were removed. Everyone knows that they are preventative measures. They have never been reinstated. We should be perfectly capable of considering their reinstatement while also discussing, coordinating and consulting. Why do my colleagues think we cannot do two things at once?

96 words

Mr. Chris Bittle

Feb/6/24 4:46:29 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the comment. I do think we can walk and chew gum at the same time, perhaps myself not always so well. The government is addressing these things. The government is focused on poverty. It is focused on gangs. It is focused on finding activities for young people and funding those programs. We can do multiple things. Though the member from Kamloops wants to repeal stronger sentences against criminals, we want that to stand. We can do multiple things at the same time. The government is taking this seriously, working with provincial leaders, working with the Province of Quebec, to find a solution to this crisis.

109 words

Ms. Lori Idlout (Nunavut, NDP)

Feb/6/24 4:47:22 p.m.
Watch

Uqaqtittiji, as I listen to the interventions and think back to the effectiveness of the NDP in this 44th Parliament, I think about, for example, what the MP for Vancouver East and I have done in securing $4 billion over seven years for urban, rural and northern housing. I think about the member of Parliament for Winnipeg Centre who got unanimous consent by all of Parliament that residential schools are a form of genocide. Having said that, I am struck by the fact that there are 24 Liberal MPs who represent Toronto and the general area of Toronto alone. What I am asking is this: Why have they failed to take action to stop criminals from stealing cars?

118 words

Mr. Chris Bittle

Feb/6/24 4:48:19 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for Nunavut for her concern about southern Ontario. The members of the Toronto caucus have been very vocal and, again, have been behind many of the items and legislation the Liberal government has brought forward. I know the Conservative Party wants to repeal tougher sentences for those who steal cars, but at the end of the day, this is something I know Toronto members have stood strongly on. As a member from southern Ontario, I have stood strongly on it. Perhaps the member for Nunavut should consult with members from the 416 area before asking such questions.

107 words

Mr. Damien Kurek

Feb/6/24 4:49:06 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. The member for Nunavut, who is entitled to the same rights and privileges we all have in this place was just insulted by the previous speaker, a parliamentary secretary for the Liberal Party. I believe that the member should apologize for demeaning her and her right to intervene in this place.

60 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès)

Feb/6/24 4:49:34 p.m.
Watch

If the hon. member for Nunavut wants to raise a point of order, it is her right. The hon. member for Nunavut.

22 words

Ms. Lori Idlout

Feb/6/24 4:49:42 p.m.
Watch

Uqaqtittiji, I would indeed like to rise on that same point of order because I am quite offended that I am being told that I might not be smart enough or might not have the level of information that I need to be able to ask smart questions. I did point to the effectiveness of what the NDP has done and pointed to the difference between that and what the Liberals have not done. The member did not answer my question in this manner.

84 words

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux

Feb/6/24 4:50:14 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I have heard the parliamentary secretary speak to and answer many questions. I can assure the member that there was in no way an attempt to be personal on the question or to be—

37 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès)

Feb/6/24 4:50:33 p.m.
Watch

We are getting into debate. The hon. parliamentary secretary.

9 words

Mr. Chris Bittle

Feb/6/24 4:50:36 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, just to clarify, I did directly answer the question of the member for Nunavut when she said that Toronto members were doing nothing about this. I stood up for Toronto members, as that was insulting to them. It is debate. I just responded that the member should speak to Toronto members about their actions. If she took offence at that, I do apologize.

65 words

Ms. Lori Idlout

Feb/6/24 4:51:00 p.m.
Watch

Uqaqtittiji, I find it difficult to accept that apology because I do not think it is a sincere one.

19 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès)

Feb/6/24 4:51:17 p.m.
Watch

I do not think we can dispute the sincerity of a member's sentiments when they express an apology, and I believe the hon. member did so. Resuming debate, the hon. member for Brantford—Brant has the floor.

39 words

Mr. Larry Brock (Brantford—Brant, CPC)

Feb/6/24 4:51:24 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-5

Madam Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo. Imagine someone waking up in their home, their castle, where they should feel safe at all times, pouring their morning cup of coffee and looking out the window at their driveway, only to realize that their prize possession, their family vehicle that was parked there the night before, is now gone. After eight years of the Prime Minister, this has become a situation all too common for Canadians. We have heard other stories of victims being robbed in parking lots and in front of their homes, some held at gunpoint in broad daylight. We will remember the story of Toronto Maple Leafs' Mitch Marner being held at gunpoint while his vehicle was stolen. Others have had criminals break into their homes searching for the keys to their vehicles. According to the Insurance Bureau of Canada, on average, more than 200 vehicles are stolen every day, meaning that a car is stolen almost every six minutes in Canada. I cannot do the quick math, but members can imagine the number of vehicles stolen since the start of this debate. During my 10 minutes of debate and five minutes of questions and comments, another three vehicles will have been stolen. This is the result of the failed approach of the Prime Minister's soft-on-crime agenda. How did we get here? We got here due to a number of important decisions made by the Prime Minister and his government, starting with Bill C-75, which allowed repeat offenders to get bail, often within hours of their initial arrest, and reoffend multiple times, sometimes on the same day, leaving police powerless to stop car thieves. Then, after criminals are convicted, the Prime Minister's reckless Bill C-5 allows them to serve their sentences in the comfort of their own homes. We all know that those who serve conditional sentences are not monitored on a regular basis, so repeat car theft offenders, while serving their sentences at home, are out on the streets creating more havoc and stealing more cars. I have said many times in the House that criminals in this country are laughing at the government. They love the soft-on-crime approach. We all know Canada is now a haven for car thieves, for organized crime to thrive, for money laundering and human trafficking. That is the legacy the Prime Minister is leaving for Canadians. After eight years of his soft-on-crime policies, the Prime Minister has created an auto theft crisis in Canada. Auto theft in the GTA alone is up 300% since he took office. Additionally, statistics tell us that, since he formed government, auto theft is up 190% in Moncton, 122% in Ottawa-Gatineau, over 106% in Montreal and over 60% in Winnipeg. It is the responsibility of the federal government to reduce auto theft as the primary prevention tools, including the Criminal Code, the RCMP, the CBSA and our port systems, are all under the federal government's jurisdiction. However, as a result of the mismanagement of these prevention tools, organized crime has taken over our ports, turning them into parking lots for stolen vehicles, which are then shipped overseas. The port of Montreal, a major hub for stolen vehicles to be shipped out of Canada, only has five CBSA agents to inspect the over 580,000 containers that leave the port each year. According to Le Journal de Montréal, one law enforcement agent said the CBSA has no resources to check containers and they check less than 1%, making it clear that the increase in auto theft is directly related to Liberal mismanagement. It is costing Canadians far too much. In places such as Ontario, insurance companies are set to increase premiums by 25% this year. As reported by Équité, it is estimated that $1 billion in vehicle theft claims were paid out in the year 2022 alone, and these costs are being passed down to drivers. What is the Liberal plan? We have been hearing about this great summit, where all the stakeholders are going to gather and talk about the problem and the solutions. Maybe in another two years from now, we might see solutions. As per our foreign affairs minister, she proudly announced to the whole world that Canada is known for convening. That is all we hear about with the government. There is meeting after meeting, summit after summit, and no action. To stop the increase in crime rates and reduce auto theft, today Conservatives are calling on the government to immediately reverse the changes to the Liberal government's soft-on-crime Bill C-5, which allowed for car-stealing criminals to be on house arrest instead of in jail. We want to strengthen the Criminal Code provisions to ensure repeat car-stealing criminals remain in jail, following the principles of both general and specific deterrents in the Criminal Code, and provide the Canada Border Service Agency and our ports with the resources they need to prevent stolen cars from leaving the country. I asked the vice-president of inspections of the CBSA today at committee how he could explain having only five agents. He said that the CBSA does not have the resources or the funding, and that if it had to inspect every container, our trade system would completely shut down. That is small comfort to victims of auto theft crime in this country, but it is a pleasing announcement for the thieves out there because, not only are our cars being shipped abroad, but also we are accepting containers from countries in Asia loaded with deadly drugs such as carfentanil and fentanyl, which are poisoning our Canadians. As the member for Brantford—Brant, I can speak to these issues personally, as my community has had over 600 vehicles stolen between the years of 2022 and 2023 alone for a population of just under 100,000 people. Sadly, it does not have the necessary funds to put into fighting car theft. We heard from the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada numerous times. The justice minister can speak all he wants about how he and his Liberal colleagues are hitting organized crime where it hurts, “funding the fight against crime” and “working with police, provinces [and] ports”, but the facts are the facts. He cannot change the fact that over 80,000 vehicles were stolen in Canada in the past year alone. The minister and his Liberal colleagues have consistently taken a dismissive stance on pressing issues. Just last summer, they brushed off concerns about rising crime rates, suggesting that Canadians were imagining the problem. What is our solution? The Prime Minister's reckless policies have caused an explosion of car thefts and made our communities dangerous, and the only action he has taken to fix this mess is to hold a summit. We do not need another summit. We need a common-sense plan to stop the theft and the crime. The solution is simple. It is the first plank of our Conservative plan to hit the brakes on car theft. To combat this Liberal oversight, Conservatives will go after the real criminals by restoring jail, not bail; increasing mandatory jail time; ending house arrest for car thieves; and increasing sentences for gang-associated car thieves. This is a pressing and urgent matter that Public Safety has a mandate to review thoroughly. Canadians cannot wait for the summit to produce results. It is time for the government to move beyond conferences, meetings, announcements and press conferences, join Conservatives and show up for Canadians. I call on all members of the House to support our motion. Help us put the brakes on auto theft once and for all, protect our communities and bring home safer streets for all Canadians. That is just common sense.

1326 words

All Topics

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

Feb/6/24 5:01:02 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I have to point out the unbelievable hypocrisy here. The member opposite talks about lack of resources when it was the Conservatives who cut 1,100 jobs out of the CBSA. They talk about lack of resources, and they were going to cut another 400 more. It has to be mentioned again that Conservatives talk about lack of resources, but they voted against $1.5 billion in funding for the CBSA, which included $1.44 billion for operating and $197 million for capital expenditures. They voted against $2.7 billion for the RCMP. That is like a municipality cutting its budget for the police and then lamenting that crime has gone up. My question for the member opposite is this: How can he explain Conservatives voting against funding for the CBSA and the RCMP?

136 words

Mr. Larry Brock

Feb/6/24 5:02:04 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, listening to that very carefully, one would almost think that this Liberal government had been in power for maybe one to two years and that it could reflect on the previous Conservative administration. When are the Liberals going to move beyond blaming all of the ills of this country on former prime minister Harper? Why do they not also go back to the Brian Mulroney years? They have had eight years to fix this mess, eight years. They have increased the public service by 40%, and they do not do a damn thing to increase confidence among Canadians.

100 words

Ms. Andréanne Larouche (Shefford, BQ)

Feb/6/24 5:02:53 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, yes, it is quite troubling. I agree with my colleague that the Liberals have done nothing, that they have been lax since 2015, and that the Bloc Québécois, and particularly my colleague from Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, even raised this issue last year. However, I find it a bit ironic to hear the Conservatives worrying about the number of employees at the Canada Border Services Agency, considering an auditor's report dating back to 2015 and 2014. Who was in power before? It was the Conservatives. I was even an assistant at the time when CBSA employees were speaking out against the Conservative government's cuts. That happened around 2010. As it turns out, it was the Conservatives who were in power. I wonder if the member could talk about those cuts, the effects of which we are now unfortunately seeing.

153 words

Mr. Larry Brock

Feb/6/24 5:03:51 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I think the time has come to stop putting blame on old Conservative policies or what the Conservatives could or should have done. This government has eight years under its belt, and it has nothing to show for it but heartache, hardship and, now, this national and worldwide reputation: “Come to Canada, where we have a thriving criminal market for you to take advantage of.”

69 words

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

Feb/6/24 5:04:31 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, in diving into the world of auto crime today, I found, of course, that the rate of theft of automobiles has also increased dramatically in the United States. I do not think our Prime Minister is responsible for that, but I am looking at it here in Canada. I will share an anecdote. One of the most shocking car thefts in my life was when I was in church and somebody went into the minister's office and figured they could open the desk. They picked a key up. They did not know what make her car was. They went outside, went beep, beep, and found and stole her car. I wonder if the hon. member knows, relatively speaking, and I think he knows more about car thefts and this issue of technological change than I do, how much the big increase in car thefts in Canada and the U.S. has to do with the ability to use technology, so that thieves can sit at the end of a driveway and actually scoop, remotely, the electronic signals to a computerized, on-off button kind of car. How much of our car theft increase is because it is just simpler to steal cars because of technological change?

209 words

SoVote

House Hansard - 276