Violence Against Pregnant Women Act

An Act to amend the Criminal Code (violence against pregnant women)

Sponsor

Cathay Wagantall  Conservative

Introduced as a private member’s bill. (These don’t often become law.)

Status

Defeated, as of June 14, 2023

Subscribe to a feed (what's a feed?) of speeches and votes in the House related to Bill C-311.

Summary

This is from the published bill. The Library of Parliament often publishes better independent summaries.

This enactment amends the Criminal Code to specify that knowingly assaulting a pregnant woman and that causing physical or emotional harm to a pregnant woman are to be considered aggravating circumstances for sentencing purposes.

Elsewhere

All sorts of information on this bill is available at LEGISinfo, an excellent resource from the Library of Parliament. You can also read the full text of the bill.

Votes

June 14, 2023 Failed 2nd reading of Bill C-311, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (violence against pregnant women)

Violence Against Pregnant Women ActPrivate Members' Business

May 9th, 2023 / 6 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Andréanne Larouche Bloc Shefford, QC

Madam Speaker, rising this evening to speak to Bill C‑311 is utterly exasperating. The Criminal Code amendment in the bill would force the courts to consider the fact that an assault victim is a pregnant woman an aggravating circumstance for sentencing purposes.

I realize this may seem like a sensitive issue, but, as usual, the Conservatives want to reopen the abortion debate. This bill is the latest in a long line of attempts to grant the fetus legal status in order to undermine women's right to control their own bodies.

I will start by explaining the pernicious effects of this bill. Then I will go over the Conservatives' history of back-door attempts. Lastly, I will remind the House about this difficult struggle for women.

First, without explicitly naming the fetus, this bill seeks to create an aggravating circumstance when the offence of assault is committed against a pregnant woman. If passed, the Conservative proposal could strengthen the premise that the legislator's intent is to grant the fetus implicit legal status. The Bloc Québécois opposes any attempt at such legislation, which would set women's rights back.

It is important to point out that the Criminal Code already enables judges imposing a sentence to consider as an aggravating factor an offence that has a significant impact on the victim, considering their personal circumstances, including their health. The victim's personal circumstances can include pregnancy, and the court can consider that as an aggravating factor under the circumstances.

Femicides against pregnant women have been documented by Canadian police forces since 2005. According to Statistics Canada, in 2005, 12 pregnant women were killed by their intimate partner, and eight pregnant women were killed by someone other than their intimate partner. Let us remember that. Not one more.

In a 2021 ruling, the Court of Quebec examined this issue when sentencing a man who pleaded guilty to assaulting his ex-wife. The judge was unequivocal about the consequences of committing such a crime against a pregnant woman. Her condition makes her more vulnerable to assault and less able to defend herself. The Quebec and Canadian courts are therefore inclined to consider a victim's personal circumstances, namely, a pregnancy, when handing down a sentence.

Our society has a duty to punish violence against women, especially violence against pregnant women, but the mechanisms to do so exist already. While it may have been tabled in good faith, the amendment in the Conservative bill brings nothing new to the table. However, we have strong reason to believe that it may be part of an anti-abortion strategy.

Second, it is important to point out that the Conservative member is continuing her ideological war against women's reproductive health.

During the previous Parliament, she sponsored a bill to criminalize abortions performed on the basis of an unborn child's sex. Despite the Leader of the Opposition's claims about being pro-choice, his caucus is clearly divided on the issue and still includes anti-choice members.

The Bloc Québécois therefore opposes Bill C‑311 given the bill's ulterior motive of securing legal status for fetuses. Bill C‑311 is an anti-abortion bill. The Bloc will make no compromise when it comes to defending women's right to control their own bodies, their right to choose, and supporting free, accessible and safe abortion services.

The Conservatives are trying to do indirectly what they cannot do directly. This bill is nothing less than an attempt to amend Canadian law in favour of their outdated anti‑abortion position, which Quebeckers have rejected. If passed, this legislative amendment could set a dangerous precedent if a Canadian court were to rule on the issue of the right to abortion.

Our elected members have a responsibility to carry out their duties honestly and to state their real intentions when they engage in dialogue on behalf of the constituents they represent. This is necessary for a healthy democracy. Obfuscating the debate for purely ideological purposes undermines the effective functioning of our democracy. These tactics need to be recognized, called out and stopped.

The Bloc Québécois demands that the Leader of the Conservative Party publicly recognize that Bill C-311 is just a partisan strategy to attack abortion, that he call on his members to oppose it and that he rein in the member for Yorkton—Melville. If he does not, if he chooses instead to vote for Bill C‑311, as he announced today, it says a lot about the influence of religious lobby groups on the Conservatives. In Quebec, we believe in secularism, which takes religion out of governance.

The member for Yorkton—Melville has previously presented anti-abortion bills. In 2016, she introduced Bill C-225, the protection of pregnant women and their preborn children act, also known as Cassie and Molly's law, which would have handed out a life sentence to anyone who “directly or indirectly causes the death of [a] preborn child”.

Is it not curious that the member for Yorkton—Melville never openly attacks the right to abortion, but that her efforts are somehow always directed at making this medical act a criminal offence with harsh sentences?

For all these reasons, we recommend that members vote against Bill C‑311.

It is also worth noting that the issue of selective abortion is not new in federal politics. A Conservative member moved a motion to condemn it in 2012, reopening the abortion debate in the process. That motion came after Conservative Stephen Woodworth's motion on the rights of the fetus that called for a parliamentary committee to study at what point a fetus should be considered a human being for the purposes of enforcing Criminal Code provisions.

These tactics, aiming to surreptitiously criminalize abortion, were carried out despite former prime minister Stephen Harper's campaign promise to not reopen the abortion debate.

Third, I would remind members that women's right to access abortion in Canada is intimately connected to Dr. Henry Morgentaler's fight to legalize this medical treatment. Prior to 1969, performing abortions was illegal in Canada. Women died trying to perform their own abortions with knitting needles and coat hangers. Do we really want to go back to that?

In 1969, Parliament made several important amendments to the Criminal Code. The section on abortion, section 273 at the time, specified when an abortion could legally be performed. The section set out criminal sanctions for doctors who did not respect the strict rules.

That same year, Dr. Henry Morgentaler opened his first clinic in Montreal, where he performed abortions after doctors and groups had debated whether or not to approve it. A year later, he was charged with performing illegal abortions. After his appeal was dismissed by the Supreme Court of Canada in 1975, he served a 10-month sentence in prison.

In 1982, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms came into effect. In 1983, Dr. Morgentaler, along with two other doctors, was charged with performing illegal abortions at Dr. Morgentaler's clinic in Toronto. Although complex, the case rests primarily on one specific point of law, namely, whether the abortion provisions of the Criminal Code infringed in an unjustified way a woman's right “to life, liberty and security of the person” as guaranteed by section 7 of the charter.

Although the ruling is also complex, the court concluded that the abortion section of the Criminal Code infringed a woman's right to security of the person, that the process by which the woman was deprived of that right was not in accord with fundamental justice, and that the right to security of the person of a pregnant woman was infringed more than was required to achieve the objective of protecting the fetus, and the means were not reasonable.

In conclusion, over 30 years after abortion was decriminalized in Canada, the Conservatives are pursuing their anti-choice militancy by tabling a bill like this one in Parliament. Their attacks on women's rights are a political manoeuvre to pander to the religious right.

The Bloc Québécois must firmly resist the Conservatives' attacks on the integrity of women and their hard-won right to control their own bodies.

Violence Against Pregnant Women ActPrivate Members' Business

May 9th, 2023 / 6:10 p.m.
See context

NDP

Leah Gazan NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB

Madam Speaker, I am not pleased to have to rise today to speak on Bill C-311, another attack on a woman's right to choose, another attack on abortion as health care, another attack on abortion rights as human rights, which is something that women, in particular, led the way to have so that we would not go back to the dark times of what has been mentioned so many times today: back-alley abortions where women died bleeding to death; gruesome. We are talking about violence, and I cannot think of anything more violent than restricting a woman's right to health care, including the right to access a safe abortion.

Bill C-311 would amend the Criminal Code to specify that knowingly assaulting a pregnant woman and that causing physical or emotional harm to a pregnant woman are to be considered aggravating circumstances for sentencing purposes. However, we know, as has been indicated over and over in this debate, that these changes are, in fact, unnecessary as judges already have the ability to apply more significant penalties for aggravating circumstances under section 718.2 of the Criminal Code.

In fact, no anti-violence organization has asked for this legislation. As somebody who has been on the frontline fighting against gender-based violence for many decades, I find it insulting to conflate an attempt to attack women's reproductive rights with true actions to end the ongoing crisis of gender-based violence. The federal government can and should pursue other ways of addressing gender-based violence, including reversing the plan to cut $150 million to women's shelters in September. If we want to protect women, including women who are pregnant, we need to make sure that they have a safe place to go. Let us not talk about the safety of women when that is not what we are really talking about, when we are attacking a woman's right to make a choice about her bodily autonomy.

I call on all members of the House to instead focus their attention on pushing all levels of government to implement the 231 calls for justice from the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls and strengthening the national action plan to end gender-based violence by adding timelines and accountability measures. Why are we not discussing that today? Why are we discussing a bill that would threaten a woman's right to health care, which includes a safe abortion? This is disturbing—

Violence Against Pregnant Women ActPrivate Members' Business

May 9th, 2023 / 6:10 p.m.
See context

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Liberal Alexandra Mendes

The hon. whip for the opposition on a point of order.

Violence Against Pregnant Women ActPrivate Members' Business

May 9th, 2023 / 6:10 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Kerry-Lynne Findlay Conservative South Surrey—White Rock, BC

Madam Speaker, we are here to debate a specific bill, and now speaker after speaker, including the present one is talking about irrelevant issues. There is nothing in this bill about health care—

Violence Against Pregnant Women ActPrivate Members' Business

May 9th, 2023 / 6:10 p.m.
See context

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Liberal Alexandra Mendes

The hon. member knows that there is quite a bit of leeway in how members approach bills—

Violence Against Pregnant Women ActPrivate Members' Business

May 9th, 2023 / 6:10 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Kerry-Lynne Findlay Conservative South Surrey—White Rock, BC

I am asking, Madam Speaker: Do you find this relevant?

Violence Against Pregnant Women ActPrivate Members' Business

May 9th, 2023 / 6:10 p.m.
See context

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Liberal Alexandra Mendes

I have not listened to the past two minutes or so as I was in discussion with a table officer. However, before that, I thought it was relevant to the bill in question. I will pay close attention henceforth.

The hon. member for Winnipeg Centre.

Violence Against Pregnant Women ActPrivate Members' Business

May 9th, 2023 / 6:15 p.m.
See context

NDP

Leah Gazan NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB

Madam Speaker, anti-choice organizations, on the other hand, are cheering on the introduction of the bill. They see it as a step forward in establishing legal protection for fetuses, which would pave the way for legal restrictions on abortion. If the bill passes, it would be a victory for those who want to limit abortion rights and would not do anything to meaningfully address gender-based violence.

I am sorry to hear that the member for Carleton has not advanced in his position on women's rights and is actively supporting this legislation. He has a history of supporting legislation that violates a woman's right to choose. I would add that the member for Carleton also has a history of supporting individuals, including Jordan Peterson, who attack the trans community He also has a history of—

Violence Against Pregnant Women ActPrivate Members' Business

May 9th, 2023 / 6:15 p.m.
See context

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Liberal Alexandra Mendes

I need to interrupt the hon. member.

There is a point of order from the hon. member for Yorkton—Melville.

Violence Against Pregnant Women ActPrivate Members' Business

May 9th, 2023 / 6:15 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Cathay Wagantall Conservative Yorkton—Melville, SK

Madam Speaker, she is not referring to the bill at all. She is defaming and abusing—

Violence Against Pregnant Women ActPrivate Members' Business

May 9th, 2023 / 6:15 p.m.
See context

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Liberal Alexandra Mendes

The hon. member for Winnipeg Centre was referring to the bill.

Violence Against Pregnant Women ActPrivate Members' Business

May 9th, 2023 / 6:15 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Cathay Wagantall Conservative Yorkton—Melville, SK

She was referring to Dr. Jordan Peterson, who has absolutely nothing to—

Violence Against Pregnant Women ActPrivate Members' Business

May 9th, 2023 / 6:15 p.m.
See context

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Liberal Alexandra Mendes

That is debate.

The hon. member was referring to the bill two minutes ago, and I was listening. She was referring to the bill, and she is using arguments she is free to use to make her points.

Violence Against Pregnant Women ActPrivate Members' Business

May 9th, 2023 / 6:15 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Cathay Wagantall Conservative Yorkton—Melville, SK

This has nothing to do with this bill.

Violence Against Pregnant Women ActPrivate Members' Business

May 9th, 2023 / 6:15 p.m.
See context

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Liberal Alexandra Mendes

The hon. members have a certain capacity to use arguments to defend their points, and that is what the hon. member for Winnipeg Centre is doing.