An Act to amend the Criminal Code (conversion therapy)

This bill was last introduced in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session, which ended in August 2021.

Sponsor

David Lametti  Liberal

Status

In committee (Senate), as of June 28, 2021
(This bill did not become law.)

Summary

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

This enactment amends the Criminal Code to, among other things, create the following offences:
(a) causing a person to undergo conversion therapy without the person’s consent;
(b) causing a child to undergo conversion therapy;
(c) doing anything for the purpose of removing a child from Canada with the intention that the child undergo conversion therapy outside Canada;
(d) promoting or advertising an offer to provide conversion therapy; and
(e) receiving a financial or other material benefit from the provision of conversion therapy.
It also amends the Criminal Code to authorize courts to order that advertisements for conversion therapy be disposed of or deleted.

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 22, 2021 Passed 3rd reading and adoption of Bill C-6, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (conversion therapy)
Oct. 28, 2020 Passed 2nd reading of Bill C-6, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (conversion therapy)

Criminal CodeGovernment Orders

October 26th, 2020 / 6:35 p.m.


See context

Conservative

Rob Moore Conservative Fundy Royal, NB

Mr. Speaker, a good starting point would be to look at the words of the minister straight from the justice department website. The minister has said that the conversations of those who work with young people, teachers, school counsellors, pastoral counsellors, faith leaders, doctors, mental health professionals, friends and family members, would not be impacted by the bill. However, the bill does not say that. A good starting point would be to hear from a large variety of individuals who are impacted, those who support the coming into force of the legislation and those who support ending conversion therapy and want to ensure we get the legislation right.

Criminal CodeGovernment Orders

October 26th, 2020 / 6:35 p.m.


See context

Bloc

Andréanne Larouche Bloc Shefford, QC

Mr. Speaker, we all know that religious groups and religious pressure are behind these conversion therapy practices. There is a myth that homosexuality is a sickness and that it leads straight to hell.

The Pope himself has recognized same-sex civil unions, so I would like to hear about why we must move faster to eradicate these prejudices. I would like to hear my colleague's thoughts on this, because prejudice against the LGBTQ+ community is no longer acceptable.

Criminal CodeGovernment Orders

October 26th, 2020 / 6:35 p.m.


See context

Conservative

Rob Moore Conservative Fundy Royal, NB

Mr. Speaker, this is an opportunity. There is support for the idea of banning conversion therapy even among faith communities, but there is also a need for the government to get the legislation right so we do not ban conversations where someone is seeking support, whether from school counsellors, teachers, pastoral counsellors, faith leaders, as the minister said. This is not included in the bill. The concern we and many have raised is with respect to the definition of “conversion therapy”. There has not been a Criminal Code definition of “conversion therapy” and the government's first try at a definition is one that could very well capture things we do not wish to be captured as a Parliament.

Criminal CodeGovernment Orders

October 26th, 2020 / 6:40 p.m.


See context

Conservative

Ron Liepert Conservative Calgary Signal Hill, AB

Mr. Speaker, I listened with interest to my colleague's remarks. I also listened very attentively earlier this afternoon to the member for Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, who gave a very impassioned speech to the House. I know some of the things he mentioned are exactly what the current speaker has talked about. I would like to get an opinion from the member as to whether he feels that by not including some of these conditions in the legislation, it will lead to court challenges that could work against what we are trying to do here and delay this taking effect.

Criminal CodeGovernment Orders

October 26th, 2020 / 6:40 p.m.


See context

Conservative

Rob Moore Conservative Fundy Royal, NB

Mr. Speaker, any legislation that amends the Criminal Code will ultimately be challenged in the courts. It is our job to write these laws. That is why it is incumbent upon parliamentarians to take into account the rights of all Canadians and ensure that legislation does what we intend it to do.

If we want to ban conversion therapy, it is important our legislation does that and does not cast a net so wide that it takes into account things that we do not intend it to. The minister has said that it is not his intent to cast the net that wide, but the issue is the language in the legislation, and that is ultimately what is before the courts when they consider a criminal case.

Criminal CodeGovernment Orders

October 26th, 2020 / 6:40 p.m.


See context

Spadina—Fort York Ontario

Liberal

Adam Vaughan LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Families

Mr. Speaker, before I begin, for my first time rising in the House since we broke from normal proceedings way back when, I would like to thank the staff at the centre table, the support staff in the halls and throughout the centre block, for not only pulling off such an extraordinary presentation of democracy but also for their service to all of us in Parliament, and in particular the pages. As a former page myself, the pages might be here for the shortest time, but their contribution is never not noted. We are glad to have them here and hope they stay safe with all Canadians as we begin this parliamentary speech.

I rise today as the Parliamentary Secretary of Families, Children and Social Development. That is a great title to speak to this issue on because how we deal with children and families, and how we develop our society, are at the heart of what we are debating today as we seek to realize and protect the rights of our neighbours, friends and family: all of us who call Canada home. There have been some very emotional presentations from members today. As society has become more comfortable discussing these issues and embracing these people, not “othering” them, their stories and their backgrounds can be told more easily, and the emotional bridges and journeys that some of us have had to take become much more profound. I want to thank the members who have stood today and shared stories of themselves, their families and their communities. They make us all stronger parliamentarians when they come here with that much personal experience.

This issue has changed so much, in just my lifetime. We look at the letters that are often attached to this debate: LGBTQ2+. I can remember when there was only one initial, and I remember when each initial was added to that list and what it meant for different communities at different times, in the city and community I represent and the family I come from. I remember, very distinctly, the bath house raids in Toronto. I remember very distinctly, because one of the people who was caught in that process, who had to be smuggled out the back door because of political implications, was a friend of the family. I remember a staff member at Legal Aid Ontario, where my mother worked, whose life was almost destroyed by that night. I remember how it gave rise to the Pride marches, and I remember how it gave rise to what was then called gay liberation.

I apologize for interrupting, but I will be sharing my time with the member for Milton in this speech.

I remember when the gay liberation movement had the word lesbian attached to it, and how trans people, bi people and all their struggles led to a stronger, better and more compassionate understanding of some of the challenges that people in our society faced. I also remember, shortly after the bath house raids, the rise of AIDS and HIV, and I remember how the stigma prevented people from getting treatment and prevented them from being comforted by family members and loved ones.

Every time we have had to achieve a transformational change in the civil rights and human rights of members of the community has been a really difficult time for politicians. I remember, for example, a debate at Queen's Park when the NDP government of the day tried to bring forth a bill that would have simply provided family benefits to families that happened to be configured differently from what was perceived to be the norm. I remember the free vote that broke into a riot at Queen's Park, because I was covering it as a reporter. I remember the pain in people's eyes because they knew, coming out of the AIDS epidemic, that the failure to recognize people as full families meant that they could not be there at the end of life with people who loved them, cared for them and were quite often the only ones providing them with the medicine and medical care they needed through their struggle with AIDS and HIV.

We have come a long way as a society by opening our hearts and our minds simultaneously to these issues. Today's debate is profoundly important because society is starting to understand that the sooner we deliver people their human rights, recognize their civil rights and deliver the understanding that we see a person's humanity, the quicker that person starts to come to terms and become a citizen like everyone else, contribute like everyone else but also get loved like everyone else. That is what is at the heart of this debate today. I recognize that when we start trying to move the emotional into the legal and trying to bring social practice into law and statute, there are difficulties.

Some of the opposition members are starting to talk about things they want to explore in committee and changes they think might be important. If those things are brought forward in the spirit of recognizing and deepening our common human rights and our common civility, then nothing but good will come from those debates.

I look forward to the committee taking hold of this issue and trying to find a way to improve this bill. No piece of legislation is ever presented in perfection. They are never passed in perfection. That does not mean we should not be trying. On this issue, it could not be more important.

I was a reporter here when the same-sex marriage debate was kicking up. I remember being a reporter at the City of Toronto, when the two Michaels came forward and decided they were going to present themselves to city hall and dare the city not to marry them. I remember being in a press conference. The city manager was there, and the politicians were there, including Kyle Rae, one of the first elected politicians in Canada to come from the gay community.

I remember asking the city clerk, “Why do you not just marry them, and let someone else deny them their human rights?” There was a brief moment when I thought the city clerk might actually just rip up the letter of disqualification right there on the spot. We all sort of stopped and hoped for it.

I was lucky enough to be invited to the wedding reception of the two Michaels. I was lucky enough to be a city councillor when Toronto became the first place in this country, and the first place on this continent, to open the doors of the wedding chapel to everybody. We would get called in the middle of a debate in the council chamber because the wedding chapel was just across the way. We would get called in and have to go to witness people's marriages.

I have to say, it only took one or two marriage ceremonies, even for those of us who were convinced in our hearts it was the right and proper thing to do, to understand that just the act of seeing that happen was transformational. We knew, from the minute we saw an old uncle or a questioning sister or a troubled sibling, that when they saw the love that was being expressed and the humanity that was being embraced, they would see this was actually a celebration of life, and not a denial of someone else's belief structure. It was actually just people expressing love.

We saw that over and over again, and we knew from that moment on society would very quickly embrace it. People have. They embrace it because as soon they witness it and they see the humanity we are trying to stand up for, protect and defend today, they are forever changed by the glory of what happens when love, and who people are, are simply honoured.

This is a profound act. This is a really important piece of legislation we are debating here today. What it does, most importantly for me as the parliamentary secretary for families, children and social development, is it goes to the heart of something which is incredibly important in this country. We know from studying homelessness that if someone is homeless at 16, the chances of them remaining and becoming chronically homeless is in the range of 80% to 90%.

Let us think about that. For someone on the streets at age 16, the chances they will be on the street at 28 or 35 go off the chart. We also know that young people who come to terms with their sexuality and are kicked out of their homes end up on the street faster than any other child in this country. When our government commits to ending homelessness, this is part of that agenda. Make no mistake about that.

I will leave the House with one last thought. Two things happened when I was a member of Parliament on a pride march. I met a young kid from North Bay, who had left North Bay because he was afraid that his sexuality would mean he could never teach in that school system. It does not matter which school system it was, but he left North Bay because he was afraid he would never be allowed to teach up there. He was just not sure the level of tolerance of his sexuality was there to give him a place where he would have a career. He came to Toronto, and he went to the pride march. I was on a truck with him, and we had not quite turned from Bloor onto Yonge. I asked, “Are you ready?” He asked, “Why?”

We turned the corner onto Yonge Street in pride, and there were a million people in front of us celebrating people for who they are. I have never seen somebody cry so hard, so fast and so joyfully in my life. The reason I knew turning that corner was going to be so important was because the year before I had done the same thing with my sister. When that happens in a family, when love does not skip a beat, but just gets deeper, and people find new ways to love and new people in the family to love with, it changes a person forever.

This legislation is going to protect people to find that experience. It is going to protect the opportunity for young people in this country to be who they are, to love who they need to love, to love themselves and to be loved by not just their families but by the whole country and this Parliament.

Let us pass this legislation. Let us take it to committee and make it better. Let us make sure the Senate gets it passed. Let us make sure that children in this land know they are free to love, free to be loved and can love freely. If we can make this country the safest place in the world to fall in love, we will have done good work as parliamentarians.

Criminal CodeGovernment Orders

October 26th, 2020 / 6:50 p.m.


See context

Conservative

Tamara Jansen Conservative Cloverdale—Langley City, BC

Mr. Speaker, Colette, a young woman in Lethbridge, Alberta, reached out. She is a young teenager, an ordinary girl from a traditional home. Her life was turned upside-down when she was gang-raped and became addicted to hard-core porn. She has said in testimony, “Being a traditional kind of girl, I rejected the bisexual feelings and non-heterosexual behaviours that my brain suggested I ought to act on.”

Since the incident, however, she suffered from sex addiction. One day, Colette made the decision to go find therapy at her local university to help reduce the feelings she was experiencing after the trauma and porn use. She said that this counselling, along with a sex addiction support group that she attended, saved her life as suicidal thoughts and despair began to affect her deeply.

What would a bill like Bill C-6 do to support the systems Colette had sought out and would the member opposite be willing to ensure that the bill is far more clear as to what is being covered? Many legal minds have been suggesting that the bill is just not clear enough—

Criminal CodeGovernment Orders

October 26th, 2020 / 6:50 p.m.


See context

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

We will have to leave it there. There are other members wishing to pose questions.

The hon. parliamentary secretary.

Criminal CodeGovernment Orders

October 26th, 2020 / 6:50 p.m.


See context

Liberal

Adam Vaughan Liberal Spadina—Fort York, ON

Mr. Speaker, that is a horrible story. It points to the critical importance that we all play a role in eliminating sexual and gender-based violence in this country.

However, in the way it was presented to me, and maybe it was because the question was not finished, it does not tell me why we should not be protecting children seeking love to be loved. What it tells me is that children need to be protected from violence and they need to be protected from becoming victimized by systems and societies. Children need to be protected. This bill would not stop difficult conversations in families, in church basements, in schools and in the hallways of Parliament, but it would stop the systematic and engineered cruelty that conversion therapy is. That is what the bill seeks to deal with.

The horrors that the member spoke about need to be spoken to in other legislation, but voting for or against this bill will not stop horrific acts of violence from traumatizing people and creating confusion in their lives going forward.

Criminal CodeGovernment Orders

October 26th, 2020 / 6:55 p.m.


See context

NDP

Alexandre Boulerice NDP Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech.

We agree with the bill, and we will vote in favour of it. The bill needs to move forward, and it is long overdue.

If we start from the premise that conversion therapy is not only dangerous, but insulting, since a person is being told that they need to be healed, why not follow that logic and ban conversion therapy altogether? Right now the door is being left open a little bit by saying that we should have conversations.

Why are the Liberals not going all the way?

Criminal CodeGovernment Orders

October 26th, 2020 / 6:55 p.m.


See context

Liberal

Adam Vaughan Liberal Spadina—Fort York, ON

Mr. Speaker, that is one of several ways of asking a question that has been asked many times here today.

The space between a private conversation and where that trips into a form of conversion therapy is a very difficult line to draw in legislation. Part of the way in which our laws work in a democratic parliamentary society is that those definitions evolve over time, to a degree. Fundamentally, what we are doing is taking away the institutional structures, the political fight and the legal ability to force people into situations where they are no longer agents of their own lives.

The issue that the member raised is a good one, as to how to stop private conversations from being damaging conversations. I am not sure we can do that with the law. I think if there was a way to do that, we would all be writing those laws and a whole—

Criminal CodeGovernment Orders

October 26th, 2020 / 6:55 p.m.


See context

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

We are going to take one more short question and short response.

The hon. member for Yukon.

Criminal CodeGovernment Orders

October 26th, 2020 / 6:55 p.m.


See context

Yukon Yukon

Liberal

Larry Bagnell LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Economic Development and Official Languages (Canadian Northern Economic Development Agency)

Mr. Speaker, I ask people watching what they would do if someone asked them to change their sexual orientation or gender identity, or, even worse, tried to force them to do it as a kid. They should think about how they would feel.

I am moved and gratified that we are criminalizing the horrendous act of trying to change who someone is. I congratulate the high school students at Porter Creek Secondary School and others who brought this up. The Yukon government, two weeks ago, passed second reading of a bill against conversion therapy. Conversion therapy leads to a lack of self-esteem, increased anxiety and depression, and even suicide, so I thank MPs from all parties who support making five new criminal offences against conversion therapy.

Criminal CodeGovernment Orders

October 26th, 2020 / 6:55 p.m.


See context

Liberal

Adam Vaughan Liberal Spadina—Fort York, ON

Mr. Speaker, I know the member for Yukon and the work he has done on a whole series of children's rights issues.

The last two initials that have been added to the long string of letters that we now identify as communities are “2S”, or two-spirited. One of the great things about being a parliamentarian is how much detail we get to learn about other parts of the country and other people who make up this great country. The indigenous community, with the concept of two-spirited people, has really raised the bar. The notion that being different makes someone special is always a little awkward, but it gives a person something else. The sense that a person has two spirits and is therefore regarded within a community as exceptionally spiritual really turns this issue on its head.

When we celebrate our children for who they are, they do better, and we do better as a country when we celebrate that love, so let us do this and and get the bill passed.

Criminal CodeGovernment Orders

October 26th, 2020 / 6:55 p.m.


See context

Milton Ontario

Liberal

Adam van Koeverden LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Diversity and Inclusion and Youth and to the Minister of Canadian Heritage (Sport)

Mr. Speaker, I would like to start by acknowledging that I am joining members from the traditional and ancestral territory of the Mississaugas of the Credit First Nation here in Milton.

It is my honour to join the House from my office to discuss amendments to the Criminal Code that would move us one step closer to banning the horrific practice of conversion therapy. While it is daunting to follow my colleague, the parliamentary secretary with the same initials as me, I want to say that I was moved by the idea of making Canada the safest country in the world in which to fall in love.

For far too long, harmful attitudes, stigma and outright bigotry and discrimination have negatively impacted the health and well-being of LGBTQ2+ people throughout the country. That is why this is such an important bill. Conversion therapy is rooted in the wrongful premise that an individual's sexual orientation and gender identity or gender expression can or should be changed. By moving forward with stopping this harmful practice, we are sending an important message. The message is that our gender identities, our gender expressions and our sexual orientations are an essential part of who we are. Nobody should be made to feel less than or as though they should change. It is not people who need to change; it is attitudes.

LGBTQ2+ persons should be understood, appreciated and celebrated. Only then can we have a truly inclusive society. This is true of everyone, whether they happen to be gay, straight, bisexual, cisgender or transgender. However, queer Canadians are the ones who are currently facing the consequences of constantly being told that only heterosexual and cisgender sexual orientations and gender identities and expressions are okay. LGBTQ2+ Canadians should never feel coerced or forced to change into people they are not.

Conversion therapy is known to cause pain, suffering and harm, and it is terrible and wrong. Canadian society needs to include, embrace and celebrate everyone as they are. This includes the full breadth of sexual orientations, gender identities and gender expressions. Regardless of sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression, who we are is not only valid but respected and valued.

The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted how much work needs to be done to build a truly safe and inclusive Canada. In fact, the evidence is all there. It was there before the pandemic. Discrimination is real in Canada, and harmful attitudes and beliefs are fuelling that discrimination.

As recently as 2014, Statistics Canada found that 31% of lesbian and gay individuals and 39% of bisexual individuals reported experiencing discrimination in the previous five years. This is simply not acceptable. Consider that in Ontario alone, my home province, an ongoing study of transgender people found that 50% of transgender youth lived in low-income neighbourhoods compared with 37% of the general population. In addition, LGBTQ2+ youth are still at particular risk of experiencing homelessness. A national youth homelessness study found that almost 30% of homeless youth are part of the LGBTQ2+ community. A 2017 study found that 75% of transgender youth in Canada aged 14 to 18 reported self-harm in the previous year compared with less than 20% of cisgender youth of the same age.

All of this is totally unacceptable and only underscores the very basic fact that stigma and discrimination are very real and continue to exist. These harmful myths, attitudes and beliefs about the LGBTQ2+ community are persisting, and they need to be stopped.

However, there is some hope and progress. In 1995, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that individuals are protected against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation through the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. In 2017, the Canadian Human Rights Act added gender identity and gender expression as prohibited grounds for discrimination. Of course, more needs to be done, but these and other measures have provided incremental progress.

Today's proposed amendments to the Criminal Code regarding conversion therapy are part of that progress. Legislative measures such as these signal a broader acknowledgement that LGBTQ2+ people are valued and appreciated and they must be embraced just as they are. There is no need for the queer community to become heterosexual or cisgender. Rather, the LGBTQ2+ community must be afforded the same opportunity as everyone to be treated with full dignity, which is the same dignity afforded to other Canadians.

Much progress is possible when hearts and minds move forward in their understanding and appreciation of LGBTQ2+ people.

For instance, among transgender youth, suicide attempts are reduced by 93% in cases where parents strongly support their children's gender identity and gender expression. I am going to say that again: Suicide attempts are reduced by 93% in cases of youth with supportive parents. That is all it takes. It is incredibly powerful. If supportive parents can have such a meaningful impact, we should be encouraging more education and deeper, more compassionate understanding so that LGBTQ2+ Canadians, particularly queer youth, can fully participate and contribute without living in fear of having to face attempts to change who they are.

PFLAG Canada is a national charitable organization founded by parents who wish to help themselves and their family members understand and accept their LGBTQ2+ children. Recently, in partnership with Arts Milton and PFLAG Halton, I supported a public art project here in Milton. It is on the side of my community office, just downstairs. Small acts of love go a long way. I want to thank the artist, JR Marr, for telling their story through art and spreading that love.

There is hope in public support. According to the Fondation Émergence, 74% of Canadians say that their knowledge of issues faced by transgender people has increased in the last five years, while 72% of Canadians believe that transgender people are being discriminated against by their employers. Canadians are becoming more aware and more alive to these very real issues and that there are, indeed, real impacts to the stigma and discrimination that LGBTQ2+ people and communities face.

Conversion therapy and efforts to force LGBTQ2+ individuals to change into people they are not reflect ongoing and long-standing views that only heterosexual and cisgender identities are valued, and that only heterosexual and cisgender identities should be valued. This is a myth that must be abolished. Sexual diversity is part of the human experience. Efforts to change and to limit that diversity cause harm, and that harm needs to end. Stopping this harm will protect LGBTQ2+ people throughout Canada, but putting an end to this harm will also benefit Canada overall. We know that there is strength in diversity. There is also strength in inclusion.

When we can all be fully included in Canadian society, when we can all fully participate, and when we can all be fully appreciated and celebrated as we are and as we were meant to be, everyone wins. That is a society that is not only surviving, but a society that is thriving.

I want to close by acknowledging again how meaningful and moving the previous speaker's mention was of creating the country that is the safest one in the world in which to fall in love.