This was a Committee of the Whole examination of the immigration minister’s spending plans, where Conservative members used their questions to press the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship on asylum numbers, border screening, visa decisions, fraudulent immigration consultants, temporary foreign workers, and the removal of people with no legal status. The minister pointed to falling asylum claim numbers, cooperation with provinces to relocate refugees, enforcement actions including the removal of 23,000 people last year, and Bill C-12 as a measure to further reduce asylum claims. Liberal members also used some questions to highlight immigration’s economic benefits and summer jobs for youth.Written by AI from the debate. Updated .
462 statements
“How can Iranian Canadians trust the minister's answers about Iranian military members in Canada when cases against them are still not resolved?”
“Mr. Chair, what confidence should Persian Canadians have in your answers about IRGC members, when cases like this are still sitting unresolved?”
Mr. Chair, what confidence should Persian Canadians have in your answers about IRGC members, when cases like this are still sitting unresolved?
“We work with the police and border officers to keep people safe. We are hiring 1,000 more staff to help them.”
“Mr. Chair, we work with partners in public safety, the RCMP and the CBSA. We have reinforced them. We are hiring 1,000 additional staff. We brought in various measures. I think Canadians in the community can feel safe.”
Mr. Chair, we work with partners in public safety, the RCMP and the CBSA. We have reinforced them. We are hiring 1,000 additional staff. We brought in various measures. I think Canadians in the community can feel safe.
“How many people were let into the country after being flagged, without proper security checks?”
“Mr. Chair, how many of these cases came into the country and were flagged but did not have adequate security?”
Mr. Chair, how many of these cases came into the country and were flagged but did not have adequate security?
“We do security checks before people come to Canada and at every step of their application.”
“Mr. Chair, there are security processes that take place prior to people’s coming into Canada, when they make application. There is ongoing security that happens at every stage of the process.”
Reply to a debate question
Relevance 49 of 100
None of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate.
See full analysisMr. Chair, there are security processes that take place prior to people’s coming into Canada, when they make application. There is ongoing security that happens at every stage of the process.
Linked statement
“I want the minister to change immigration law. Foreign criminals should not get lighter sentences.”
“Mr. Chair, Conservatives gave the minister multiple opportunities to admit tonight that the Liberals have failed the victims of foreign criminals. Her answer was “Oh well”, and she demurred on the importance. I will give her one more chance. Will she commit tonight to amending the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act so foreign criminals no longer get sentencing discounts?”
Mr. Chair, Conservatives gave the minister multiple opportunities to admit tonight that the Liberals have failed the victims of foreign criminals. Her answer was “Oh well”, and she demurred on the importance. I will give her one more chance. Will she commit tonight to amending the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act so foreign criminals no longer get sentencing discounts?
“We cannot change that part of the law. It is not even in the act.”
“Mr. Chair, if I were not a lawyer who practised law for 22 years, I might fall into that trap. The point is, there is nothing to amend. It is not in the act.”
Mr. Chair, if I were not a lawyer who practised law for 22 years, I might fall into that trap. The point is, there is nothing to amend. It is not in the act.
“The minister refused to speak out against the Kitchener strangler. I want to know if she accepts foreign criminals strangling women in Kitchener, yes or no.”
“Mr. Chair, we gave the minister 10 separate opportunities to denounce the Kitchener strangler. She refused. Does she condone the strangling of women by foreign criminals in the city of Kitchener, yes or no?”
Mr. Chair, we gave the minister 10 separate opportunities to denounce the Kitchener strangler. She refused. Does she condone the strangling of women by foreign criminals in the city of Kitchener, yes or no?
“Serious crimes must have serious consequences. This should apply to everyone in Canada, no matter who they are or what their legal status is.”
“Mr. Chair, serious crimes deserve serious consequences. It does not matter who criminals are and what status they have in Canada.”
Mr. Chair, serious crimes deserve serious consequences. It does not matter who criminals are and what status they have in Canada.
“Canadians do not trust our immigration system anymore because of fraud, weak security, and too much sympathy for criminals who are not citizens. I want the minister to explain why she is proud of her record.”
“Mr. Chair, the minister brags about her first year, but what people see is fraud, security failings, compassion for non-citizen criminals, and an immigration system that Canadians do not trust anymore. How does she defend that record?”
Question or comment in debate
Signal 17 of 100
Much of this statement went to praise, blame, greetings, routine procedure or general stories rather than reasons, requests or specific points.
See full analysisMr. Chair, the minister brags about her first year, but what people see is fraud, security failings, compassion for non-citizen criminals, and an immigration system that Canadians do not trust anymore. How does she defend that record?
“I disagree with the member. Under my watch, asylum claims are down, and there are fewer temporary foreign workers and international students. We have improved our system to bring in the skilled workers we need.”
“Mr. Chair, I disagree with the member totally. If he really wants to look at my record, I am going to need a bit of time here, but asylum claims are down and temporary resident work permits and foreign students are down. Perhaps the member wants them at zero. I am not sure. Maybe he should be talking to his community. We have strengthened our program to attract the talent we need—”
Reply to a debate question
Signal 35 of 100
Much of this statement went to praise, blame, greetings, routine procedure or general stories rather than reasons, requests or specific points.
See full analysisMr. Chair, I disagree with the member totally. If he really wants to look at my record, I am going to need a bit of time here, but asylum claims are down and temporary resident work permits and foreign students are down. Perhaps the member wants them at zero. I am not sure. Maybe he should be talking to his community. We have strengthened our program to attract the talent we need—
“The law says non-citizens who commit serious crimes must be deported, but the minister has not closed a loophole that lets them stay. A temporary foreign worker assaulted and robbed a woman, but got a lighter sentence just to avoid deportation. I want the minister to explain to the victim why this person is still in Canada.”
“Mr. Chair, the law requires that non-citizens convicted of a serious crime be deported, yet the minister refuses to close a loophole that keeps them here. A temporary foreign worker assaulted a woman then robbed her, yet he was given a lenient sentence to avoid deportation. Can the minister tell the victim why this person is still in Canada?”
Mr. Chair, the law requires that non-citizens convicted of a serious crime be deported, yet the minister refuses to close a loophole that keeps them here. A temporary foreign worker assaulted a woman then robbed her, yet he was given a lenient sentence to avoid deportation. Can the minister tell the victim why this person is still in Canada?
“We are managing immigration to strengthen communities and protect our population. We are bringing in skilled tradespeople, helping rural areas, and bringing in more doctors and health workers quickly.”
“Mr. Chair, I will continue on the fact that we are strengthening our communities. We are protecting our population. We are managing immigration. We are bringing in talented tradespeople, strengthening rural communities, attracting health workers, fast-tracking physicians and—”
Reply to a debate question
Relevance 48 of 100
None of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate.
See full analysisReply to a debate question
Clarity 40 of 100
Much of this statement used imprecise wording, lacked details on timing or responsibility, or made broad claims without support.
See full analysisMr. Chair, I will continue on the fact that we are strengthening our communities. We are protecting our population. We are managing immigration. We are bringing in talented tradespeople, strengthening rural communities, attracting health workers, fast-tracking physicians and—
“A judge gave a light sentence to a non-citizen who beat his girlfriend so that he would not be deported. I want the minister to explain to the victim why this person is still in Canada.”
“Mr. Chair, a non-citizen in Kitchener battered his girlfriend, then a judge gave him a lenient sentence so he would not be deported. Can the minister tell the victim why this person is still in Canada?”
Mr. Chair, a non-citizen in Kitchener battered his girlfriend, then a judge gave him a lenient sentence so he would not be deported. Can the minister tell the victim why this person is still in Canada?
“Criminals face consequences no matter their status, whether they are Canadian, temporary residents, or permanent residents.”
“Mr. Chair, criminals, regardless of their status, whether they are Canadian, temporary residents or permanent residents, face consequences.”
Mr. Chair, criminals, regardless of their status, whether they are Canadian, temporary residents or permanent residents, face consequences.
“A non-citizen truck driver got a light sentence after causing a fatal crash so they would not be deported. I want the minister to explain to the victim's family why this person is still in Canada.”
“Mr. Chair, they do not. A non-citizen trucker received a lenient sentence specifically so they could dodge deportation after they caused a fatal crash in Ontario. Can the minister tell the family of the victim why this person is still in Canada?”
Mr. Chair, they do not. A non-citizen trucker received a lenient sentence specifically so they could dodge deportation after they caused a fatal crash in Ontario. Can the minister tell the family of the victim why this person is still in Canada?
“Immigration law does not give criminals shorter sentences. Border officers still investigate cases and deport people.”
“Mr. Chair, there is nothing in the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act that reduces sentencing or disallows people from receiving it. CBSA investigates those cases, and deportations are conducted.”
Mr. Chair, there is nothing in the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act that reduces sentencing or disallows people from receiving it. CBSA investigates those cases, and deportations are conducted.
“A non-citizen was convicted of assault and got a light sentence so he would not be deported. I want the minister to explain to the victim why this person is still in Canada.”
“Mr. Chair, the minister claims that, yet it is still happening over and over again. A non-citizen was found guilty of assault then broke his no-contact order, yet he was still given a lenient sentence to avoid deportation. Can the minister tell his victim why he is still in Canada?”
Mr. Chair, the minister claims that, yet it is still happening over and over again. A non-citizen was found guilty of assault then broke his no-contact order, yet he was still given a lenient sentence to avoid deportation. Can the minister tell his victim why he is still in Canada?
“A non-citizen was caught trafficking cocaine and got a light sentence so he would not be deported. Why is he still in Canada?”
“Mr. Chair, this non-citizen did not face serious consequences. He was caught trafficking cocaine and was given a lenient sentence to avoid deportation. Can the minister tell Canadians, in spite of all her claims, why he is still in Canada?”
Mr. Chair, this non-citizen did not face serious consequences. He was caught trafficking cocaine and was given a lenient sentence to avoid deportation. Can the minister tell Canadians, in spite of all her claims, why he is still in Canada?
“I am the immigration minister. The immigration law and rules do not allow what the member is talking about.”
“Mr. Chair, again, I am the immigration minister. I am looking at the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act and regulations. There is nothing in that document and in those rules that permits what the member is alluding to.”
Mr. Chair, again, I am the immigration minister. I am looking at the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act and regulations. There is nothing in that document and in those rules that permits what the member is alluding to.
“The Conservatives tried to pass a bill to fix a loophole, but the minister voted against it. Now, a non-citizen convicted of a major crime got house arrest instead of being deported. Why is she allowed to stay in Canada?”
“Mr. Chair, there is nothing to prevent it, either, and that is why the Conservatives brought in a bill to close this loophole. The minister could have told the justice minister to support it, but in fact she voted against it. This is her fault. A non-citizen was convicted of major theft, a crime that carries a punishment of 10 years. Instead of being deported, she received house arrest to avoid deportation. Why should she be allowed to stay in Canada?”
Mr. Chair, there is nothing to prevent it, either, and that is why the Conservatives brought in a bill to close this loophole. The minister could have told the justice minister to support it, but in fact she voted against it. This is her fault. A non-citizen was convicted of major theft, a crime that carries a punishment of 10 years. Instead of being deported, she received house arrest to avoid deportation. Why should she be allowed to stay in Canada?
