Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to be here speaking on behalf of the people of Markham—Unionville.

Today, we are discussing a bill framed around creating strong borders, yet somehow, it does so much more and so much less than its stated goal. We have a 140-page border bill that somehow also pushes for warrantless access to information about Internet subscribers. If this is the case, the Liberals are pushing for an expansive definition of strong borders. However, in earlier questions about the bill, when we, the official opposition, critiqued elements that could be added to it, our efforts were denied because the Liberals cited a narrow definition of this being merely a borders bill. Which is it? A borders bill that has extensive unlawful access provisions is clearly a bill that can include more real community safety elements, so let us touch on that.

To Conservatives, strong borders mean being tough on drugs across the entire supply chain. This includes drug production, not just drug trafficking. This includes drug producers, not just drug traffickers. In short, it is not just about the substances, but about the actors who are involved.

When we are talking about actors, we need real consequences for the perpetrators of these acts of social destruction. We need mandatory minimum sentences, not bail, when the issue is about fentanyl. How can a borders bill request warrantless access to Internet subscriber information and not also have strong measures against the fentanyl problem? An expansive definition of a strong border requires a holistic tackling of the fentanyl supply chain.

Unfortunately, even if Bill C-2 passes, Canadians will still be left with the unsafe society that the Liberals legislated into being. We live in a society where fentanyl traffickers have no mandatory minimums and can receive bail and where house arrest is considered a worthy punishment for the monsters who are killing our community.

Conservatives will keep repeating this one simple fact until the Liberals hear us: It takes only two milligrams of fentanyl to kill a fellow Canadian. If members understand this simple fact, anyone trafficking over 40 milligrams of fentanyl should be considered no different than a mass murderer who guns down 20 people. However, the Liberals want these people to walk free on bail and have a comfortable time under house arrest. They will not punish people on the same level as mass murders, yet they have the audacity to want warrantless access to our Internet information in their borders bill.

Are we truly talking about a borders bill? To Conservatives, a strong border means being tough on crime in order to secure the safety of our hard-working communities. From 2015 through 2023, total violent crime was up 50%, total homicides were up 28%, gang-related homicides were up about 78% and total violent firearms offences were up about 116%, which has increased for nine consecutive years.

Just as with fentanyl traffickers, we want to see a similar approach for firearms traffickers and the gun-wielding gangsters they serve. We want mandatory minimums, we want an end to bail for these particular offences and we want an end to house arrest. However, we live in a world where the Liberals have legislated an easy time for repeat offenders while launching a crusade against legal gun owners.

I have established what the bill does not have but should. Let me now outline what is has but probably should not.

The strong borders bill apparently finds the need to encroach upon norms we hold dear for our civil liberties. We are deeply concerned that the bill would grant people the ability to open our mail without our consent. We are deeply concerned that the bill would compel Internet companies to hand over our private data without our consent. We are further concerned that the bill even attempts to interfere in how Canadians use cash. Do the Liberals wish for a 100% digital economy?

A world where the Liberals can encroach upon cash transactions and, further, have the ability to access our private digital information leads to a world where they will eventually have complete oversight over our transactions. Is this necessary for a strong borders bill? Does this make us true north strong and free? No, it never can. The bill would curtail the freedoms of hard-working Canadians while letting repeat criminals walk free on bail. This is madness made legal.

If Bill C-2 is going to be a narrowly defined borders bill that has no room to address our drug and gun issues, it is definitely a bill that has no room for warrantless access to our mail and Internet data while limiting our capacity to use cash. However, because it is clearly a bill with an expansive definition of what constitutes a strong border, we Conservatives have some recommendations that require inclusion.

We have four points that merit consideration. One, a strong border means toughening penalties for repeat violent offenders. Two, a strong border means ending catch-and-release bail and house arrest for fentanyl traffickers and gun gangsters. Three, a strong border means eliminating the multiple murder discount in sentencing. Four, a strong border means tackling drug issues holistically, prioritizing treatment over drug distribution to support those battling addiction.

What we need is a strong borders bill that will take public safety seriously while also protecting Canadian freedoms. What we have instead is a bill that does not address the core problems on the drug and crime files while completely disrespecting the freedoms that Canadians hold dear. Bill C-2 is an omnibus bill that falls well short of protecting Canadians while overreaching on our civil liberties.

Michael Ma