Bill C-3

An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Canada Labour Code

This enactment amends the Criminal Code to, among other things,
(a) create an offence of intimidating a person in order to impede them from obtaining health services, intimidating a health professional in order to impede them in the performance of their duties or intimidating a person who assists a health professional in order to impede the person in providing that assistance;
(b) create an offence of obstructing or interfering with a person’s lawful access to a place at which health services are provided, subject to a defence of attending at the place for the purpose only of obtaining or communicating information; and
(c) add the commission of an offence against a person who was providing health services and the commission of an offence that had the effect of impeding another person from obtaining health services as aggravating sentencing factors for any offence.
It also amends the Canada Labour Code to, among other things,
(a) extend theperiod during which an employee may take a leave of absencefrom employment in the event of the death of a child and provide for the entitlement of anemployee to a leave of absence in the event of the loss of an unbornchild;
(b) repeal the personal leave that an employee may take to treat their illness or injury;
(c) provide that an employee may earn and take up to 10 days of medical leave of absence with pay in a calendar year; and
(d) authorize the Governor in Council to make regulations to modify, in certain circumstances, the provisions respecting medical leave of absence with pay.

Criminal Code

[Marc Serré, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Official Languages]

Madam Speaker, first let me congratulate you on your appointment.

I would also like to take this opportunity, in this 44th Parliament, to sincerely thank the constituents of Nickel Belt for placing their trust in me for a third time. I also want to thank my wife, Lynn, for her unconditional support. It is not always easy to be the spouse of a member of the House of Commons. We also work very hard in the community. I want to give a big thank you to my mother, family, all the many volunteers who worked in the community, and my staff, Rebecca, Anne, Kaylie, Sheri, Sabrina and Stéphanie, for their support.

It is an honour to follow in my father's footsteps as the member for Nickel Belt and also to take up my new duties as the parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Official Languages.

Today, I am pleased to speak to Bill C-3, an act to amend the Criminal Code and the Canada Labour Code, at second reading stage.

Bill C-3 proposes reforms to the Criminal Code that would respond to the issues that have come to the forefront of the pandemic. The bill would seek to enhance protection to health workers and those who need their services at a critical time in Canada. I firmly believe that the proposed reforms show restraint in dealing with the very difficult circumstances that have arisen, particularly due to the small minority of COVID-19-related deniers and individuals engaging in serious and harmful conduct during anti-vaccination protests targeting the health sector and, as indicated earlier, retail and other sectors. I am proud of the way this government has dealt with this issue.

Bill C-3 proposes reforms that are targeted in nature and demonstrate the utmost respect for our Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Today, I would like to speak about the events that we have all witnessed and that have led us to this important reform to criminal law. I will also speak to why our government’s commitment to enact these reforms is crucial in protecting not only our health care workers, but each and every Canadian who is in need of health services.

Currently, the Criminal Code provides a wide range of general responses to threats, intimidation and other forms of violence directed at all persons. However, new explicit offences are critical to send a clear message that such conduct is never appropriate.

We have all seen what has been reported in the media, stories about health workers being targeted directly and threatened over social media platforms, including Twitter, because of their work in promoting public health measures and treating those fallen ill to the pandemic. Health care facilities across the country were specifically targeted last summer and early fall, with images and reports of some ambulances being surrounded by a crowd and health care professionals being confronted when accessing their workplaces, as well as patients needing police escorts to access certain facilities.

In a November 5 tweet by Anthony Dale, president of the Ontario Hospital Association, he reported that one hospital CEO had received death threats because of the implementation of a mandatory vaccination policy. Other physicians and medical associations are reporting death threats against health care professionals. I am deeply troubled by these accounts.

Vaccine misinformation has unfortunately caused many to distrust and attack the medical community.

Examples are popping up near my riding of Nickel Belt and other parts of northern Ontario. Recently, Dr. Gretchen Roedde, a family physician from Latchford, a small community in northern Ontario, was victimized online, at home and reported by a growing anti-vaccination movement. Dr. Roedde has given in to these pressures and has decided to close her practice, leaving many in the community without adequate care. This is a chilling reminder of the challenges faced by our health care providers.

The Ontario Medical Association, OMA, and the Canadian Medical Association, CMA, have recently said that abuse and harassment of doctors during the pandemic is growing and is unacceptable.

Another worrisome trend we are seeing is that parents and children going to vaccination clinics are being subjected to threats and intimidation. On November 28, a woman from North Bay went to one of these clinics with her seven-year-old son, who had just become eligible for the COVID-19 vaccine. She later reported that she had been subjected to a torrent of verbal abuse from anti-vax protesters while entering and leaving the clinic. The protesters went so far as to shout that she was committing genocide and poisoning her son, and they yelled out false information about the vaccine in front of the seven-year-old child. Such behaviour must stop.

I know that the members of the House support the right to protest. However, we must all agree that this is neither the way nor the place to do it. It is totally unacceptable.

While I believe all Canadians accept that we have differences of opinion, very few Canadians accept this behaviour toward health workers and people who try to obtain health care services. While the charter protects the right to express opinions and conduct peaceful protests, it does not protect against violent forms of speech and activity. I am confident the bill reflects the rights and freedoms enshrined in the charter by ensuring that activity that is purely for the purposes of communicating a message and that remains peaceful is not criminalized.

We must ensure that every Canadian can safely get vaccinated, especially children who are now eligible for the vaccine. Every Canadian also deserves to have safe access to essential health services and not fear being attacked or intimidated as they make their way to a hospital or vaccination clinic. This bill is about federal leadership to ensure that our health care heroes can safely do their jobs, free from obstruction, intimidation and threats.

I would like to touch on another matter that is important to me and many in our country. We cannot forget the significant struggles and hardship that women have faced, both legally and practically, in accessing abortion services. Many of those challenges continue, as women encounter barriers in accessing abortion services, including aggressive, intimidating, disturbing and even violent anti-abortion protest activity. Abortion service providers and their families have also been subject to similar conduct in Canada during its history. The bill applies to health services in general and the amendments will support and protect women in making their decisions for their own bodies without obstruction, intimidation or fear.

The bill would also make it an offence to impede another person from accessing health care facilities. No one should be prevented from accessing health care.

I firmly believe that the Criminal Code amendments proposed in Bill C-3 are imperative to give protections to those who undertake to care for Canadians during their most dire time of need. There is no doubt that Bill C-3 proposes reforms that are carefully crafted and responsive to the harms facing the health sector in Canada.

For those reasons, I urge all members to support Bill C-3.

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Madam Speaker, Bill C‑3 is obviously very interesting. I would like to add a few comments to the debate. Health care workers have risked their lives and overcome danger to protect us.

It is unacceptable for the majority to be controlled by a certain minority that wants to rule the streets. In this case, health care workers need to be protected. The right to demonstrate is very important. It is a form of freedom of expression that we hold dear. However, one part of the population cannot be held hostage for the sole purpose of expressing disagreement that is not unanimous.

[Taleeb Noormohamed, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Nickel Belt.

Before I begin my formal comments, I would like to tell the member for Bow River that he does indeed represent a beautiful riding. I have enjoyed many trips to his part of the country, and it is a beautiful part of Canada.

I am thankful for the opportunity to discuss Bill C-3, an act to amend the Criminal Code and the Canada Labour Code, which I am proud to support. As we continue the fight against COVID-19, this legislation is particularly important. It is important because it protects federally regulated workers when they get sick with 10 paid sick days. It is important because it serves to protect those who have served tirelessly and continue to do so, preserving and protecting the health of each and every one of us.

The Criminal Code amendments proposed in this bill have become an unfortunate necessity given the behaviour of a small number of Canadians who are not supportive of the public health measures put in place to protect the health and safety of our communities and to ensure our future recovery.

The vast majority of Canadians have shown tremendous appreciation, gratitude, kindness and support for our health care workers, just as all members of this House have done and continue to do. They, like us, believe in the right to peaceful protest, but those out there who have chosen violence and intimidation have put the mental and physical well-being of our health care workers at grave risk.

I am certain that many members of this House find it hard to fathom that at a time like this, during a pandemic, when health care workers have given everything for us, in some cases their lives, that anyone would threaten or harass them as they try to care for us. I find it difficult to understand why anyone would seek to obstruct their fellow citizens from getting vital treatments, whether for critical emergency cases, cancer treatments or necessary surgery.

My riding of Vancouver Granville is home to many of Vancouver’s health care workers and hospitals, such as Vancouver General Hospital, BC Women’s Hospital and Health Centre and BC Children’s Hospital. It is the epicentre of British Columbia’s health care infrastructure. Those who work in the health care field seek nothing more than the ability to do their jobs safely.

This summer, my community, Vancouver Granville, was ground zero for anti-vaxxers and anti-maskers, who harassed and threatened health care workers and patients at VGH. They endangered the safety of our exceptional health care workers by making threats, inciting others to violence, obstructing passage into health facilities and intimidating patients from accessing vital health care services. In short, they decided to put themselves, and their selfish views, ahead of their fellow Canadians. This type of behaviour is intolerable, particularly at a time when access to health care services is more essential than ever before. We cannot have our health care workers driven from their profession due to unsafe working conditions.

Like many in this House, I have spoken to health care workers in my riding who have shared the unacceptable violence and harassment they have experienced on the job. One nurse told me that she had never, in 23 years, feared for her life until this summer. Trying to get through a protest to her shift, she was jeered, called a sheep and a traitor. She was coughed on, pushed and physically prevented from entering VGH. She told me that she does not want to be made a hero. She just wants to be able to do her job safely.

Another health care worker, a recent immigrant to this country, told me he thought that in Canada we believed in science and in taking care of one another. That was why he escaped to come to Canada for a better life. He said he just could not believe what he was seeing around him. He shared that he had been harassed verbally, shoved while trying to help a doctor get through to the doors of the hospital and had his mask ripped off his face a number of times.

These are the kinds of acts that the existing Criminal Code and the proposed measures in Bill C-3 target. No Canadian should fear for their safety when seeking or providing health care services, especially those who have been on the front lines of the COVID-19 pandemic. The incredible health care workers at VGH, the BC Women’s Hospital, the BC Children's Hospital, and all facilities across Vancouver Granville and Canada, deserve our gratitude, our care and our protection.

While the pandemic is the immediate context of concern, these forms of harmful conduct in the health care sector are not new. Studies show that health care workers experienced high rates of on-the-job violence long before the pandemic. We know this problem is widespread and well established. The measures proposed in Bill C-3 aim to provide better protection for these workers and to secure safe access to their services of all of us who depend on them.

The measures proposed in the bill are designed to strengthen existing protections in two primary ways. First, two specific new offences are being added to the Criminal Code. The first new offence is intended to prevent intimidation of health care workers when they are performing their duties and of individuals requiring care or obtaining a health service.

The second new offence would prohibit obstructing any individual from entering a health care facility, because every Canadian has the right to unimpeded access to health care services.

The second set of measures would add aggravating sentencing factors, because the health care sector has advocated for years to protect its workers in the event of assault.

These measures respond to the concerns of health care workers across the country. As we continue to address the evolving challenges of COVID-19, we need to support our health care workers by ensuring they have an accessible and safe working environment, one free from harassment, intimidation and violence.

The COVID-19 pandemic has put a major strain on our health care system. We must ensure that the people who work in this sector can continue to provide critical care to keep Canadians healthy and safe. This is exactly what these Criminal Code amendments would do.

I would be remiss not to mention again another important piece of this bill, which would ensure that all federally regulated workers would have access to 10 paid sick days. No one should have to make the difficult decision between going to work sick and not feeding their families. Paid sick leave would provide vital support to workers, their families and the health of our communities, as we continue to face new challenges in the fight against COVID-19.

Access to paid sick leave is crucial to our economic recovery and to strengthening the social safety net Canadians rely on. Together, these measures would help Canadians as we come out of this pandemic.

I know all members of this House care deeply about our health care workers, and I ask each and every member of this House do what we know is possible and come together across party lines to pass this important piece of legislation without delay.

Through this pandemic, we have referred to our health care workers as heroes. Now let us do our part to protect them.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons (Senate)]

Madam Speaker, I heard the member speak a little about Bill C-3, but I was really intrigued about the comments he was making before that. The reason I had my face in my hands when he looked over at me was because I was thinking about the comment he made about how electric vehicles, and I drive one, use a lot of plastic to make. Indeed, that is the case. There is no doubt a lot of petroleum products go into that process.

Does the member not agree that with incredible human ability we might be able to strive to develop new technologies that do not require petroleum or does he think we are just inevitably forever stuck in this state of needing oil? Does he not think that perhaps we will be able to evolve our way out of this dependency?

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

Madam Speaker, it is an honour and always a privilege to rise in this House. This is the first time that I have been able to do this in the 44th Parliament. This being my first official speech, we all need to remember that there are 338 seats in this House and every seat is a great seat, other than yours, Madam Speaker. That one is special and we understand that the Speaker has that exception and a different seat.

Please allow me to give thanks to the many people who helped me earned the trust of the great people of the Bow River riding for the third time, particularly my family for their support.

Allow me to indulge a little and share some of the great things I am proud of in my riding. There are 60 communities covering approximately 24,000 square kilometres and home to over 115,000 proud Albertans. Bow River is truly a pearl of the country because of the people in this riding. We are fortunate, for example, to have the largest irrigation districts in Canada. Irrigation ag farms make up 4% of the arable land in Alberta, but they produce 28% of the Alberta ag GDP.

It is an energy-rich area. When the railroads were built through in the early 1980s, they would have had camp fires to cook their food. They would have done a little digging and found they had more fire than expected. This was not because of the wood, because there was a lack of wood in the Bow River riding, but because of the natural gas so close to the surface. They had huge fires to cook with just by poking in the ground. This riding is rich in natural resources.

When people talk about electric vehicles, the proponents need to understand that these types of vehicles have much more plastic than the current ones that we drive. Where is that plastic going to come from? It will come from natural resources.

There are new technology investments in our riding. The largest solar farm is being built in this riding. There is carbon capture, utilization and storage. There is drilling for helium, which my friend's rig is doing in my riding currently. I will be visiting it soon to see how they are drilling for helium. It is much better than having his rigs working in Texas. They are working here. However, he is short of truck drivers, which is a challenge these days in my riding. On the horizon, clean energy projects like hydrogen are coming.

However, my riding has not been without strain, especially in the last few years. Urban Canadians need to understand where their food comes from; no, not just from a grocery store. I have a very upscale farming operation that grows heritage carrots and tomatoes in my riding. During the summer, they provide tours. On one of those tours, they dig the carrots and give them to the people to eat. The owner of this property was really set back when someone said, “I have never eaten anything that has come out of the ground before.”

Food ag producers and natural resources are not located in urban Canada. About 60% of this country's infrastructure, the roads and bridges, are in rural Canada, like the Bow River riding. Rural riding infrastructures bring production to urban ridings to consume and export. That is in the Bow River riding. The government and urban people need to understand this much better. The work we have done for the betterment of this nation has been thanked with demonization of Albertans and energy, and the castigation of our farmers and ranchers.

During COP26, there was an academic who said we should not have cattle on the great Prairies of North America, we should grow trees on it. They have to be kidding me. The buffalo mowed that Prairie land for thousands of years, it grows Prairie grass, and he thinks they can have trees on the Prairies. It is a challenge when people do not understand the environment in my riding.

Nevertheless, our people are steadfast in their pursuit of achievement, bold in their ambition, and caring for their neighbours and friends. We have some large populations like centres in Chestermere, Strathmore, Taber and Brooks, and also smaller villages and hamlets like Milo, Looma and Patricia. If someone has not gone to the Patricia bar, they should go. It is an experience in itself. I am proud to call this exceptional riding home and represent this riding in the House.

I see my friend for Kingston and the Islands is wondering if I am going to talk about Bill C-3, and yes I am going to. Bill C-3 is an act to amend the Criminal Code and the Canada Labour Code regarding protests and medical leave.

In 1935, the Alberta Health Insurance Act was the first Canadian health insurance act to provide public funding for medical services. It is considered an early step toward the medicare system and toward laying the groundwork for the 1969 universal health insurance program.

The history of nursing in our province dates back to 1895 where programs to train nurses began close to the Bow River riding at the Medicine Hat General Hospital and at the Calgary General Hospital. The success of these training programs led other Alberta hospitals to bring their own training programs. By 1915, there were 10 programs in existence across Alberta. These training programs prepared nurses to work in both hospital settings and private practice. Today, nursing is both a degree and diploma program offered in universities and post-secondary institutions across the country. They provide specialized training for these careers that are so vital to our health care system, which brings me to the issue regarding the legislation before us.

Canada's protection for the freedom of peaceful assembly is enshrined in our charter and in our legal status. In recent years, it seems as though we have seen the lines between peaceful protests and riot being blurred. However, it is important to note that peaceful protest is a right.

I have experienced some of those challenges that we had in the 1960s. I remember being on Parliament Hill in 1967 in a protest against the Vietnam War. Not long after that, I was in Detroit where the riots basically destroyed much of that city, and some of it has never recovered. These riots had to do with the Vietnam War and civil rights issues in the 1960s. I saw, numerous times in the United States, where it degenerated from protest to riot.

Speaking of nurses and doctors, my neighbour is a nurse who just retired in the last month. Over the years, I had the opportunity to have many conversations with this nurse. She is a fantastic person and a great neighbour with stories of working in the health system, and it was a challenge during COVID. This is a person who was in charge of the ER and saw the challenges before COVID in emergency care and during the COVID pandemic in the ER. We had conversations about the challenges, and it was always interesting and gratifying to listen to her commitment to the patients in our community.

My doctor, Dr. Erik, is one of many who came from South Africa, and whom I have known very well from the first day he came. Dr. Erik, his wife and small child had to leave South Africa with nothing, because South Africa would not allow them to bring anything. Both sets of grandparents were left behind in South Africa. Dr. Erik is not only my doctor, but he is committed to the community and service in the community. Our rural GP doctors are incredible with the services they provide. During COVID, there was a lot of stress and many challenges.

Respect of law and having some moral high ground would presume that protests should not be occurring in front of health buildings. We saw people out banging pots at different times of the day, we saw the parades and we saw the banners, but we also saw people getting more restless during the pandemic, not knowing which way the rules were going. It was a frustrating time. However, protesting in front of hospitals may prevent those who really need to access this critical piece of Canadian infrastructure from getting the care they need, which is the critical piece for me.

I trust my health care friends and neighbours. In the election campaign forums, I spoke in anger against hospital and health facility protests. We do not have laws to protect, but I want to stand to say again in this place: Do not protest at health facilities or against our health care workers.

[Earl Dreeshen, Conservative, Red Deer—Mountain View, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Bow River.

As this is my first opportunity to address the chamber during debate, I will first express my appreciation to my fellow parliamentarians on selecting you, Mr. Speaker, as our Speaker. You have also selected an excellent group of parliamentarians to serve us in your stead, so thank you very much.

Before I proceed with my points on Bill C-3, please allow me to also thank the fine people of Red Deer—Mountain View, who have honoured me with the privilege to serve as their representative once again here in the House of Commons.

None of us makes it to this place on our own, and from that perspective, I wish to recognize not only the numerous volunteers and staff who have supported me, and many throughout the five campaigns I have been in, but also my devoted family, who have stood steadfast beside me. Although serving my community is a tremendous honour, it can also take a toll on my family, and I am eternally grateful for their support. My wife Judy; our son Devin and daughter Megan; our son-in-law Hanno; and our grandchildren Julian, Serena and Conrad are indeed the inspiration for my service to my community.

I would like to particularly highlight Julian, who will be turning eight this month, and put on my proud grandfather hat for a moment. Julian has a skill that I wish I had as a politician. When he asks someone their name, whether they are a clerk in a store, people at a library or teachers and students in his school, he knows and remembers their names and, with that, everything they would have spoken about in conversation. That ability is every politician's dream.

Throughout Julian's journey in the health care world, he has never hesitated to put a smile on the faces of those caring for him. He has bravely faced procedures that most would struggle with and has never complained. He can manoeuvre his electric wheelchair better than most truckers, and I have seen first-hand the impact his nurses and doctors have made on his physical health and sense of security while in their care.

It has been through this journey that Julian has given me the greatest pause to reflect upon the legislation that we have before us. I have a passion not only for everyone who seeks help in our health care system, but for those amazing individuals who help us through some of the most difficult and turbulent times of our lives. Indeed, they continually go above and beyond any part of their job description so that we can feel safe in our most vulnerable moments.

My family, like most, is no stranger to all sides of the health care system. Because of this, I have looked intently at the legislation presented by the hon. Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, legislation that would enact amendments to the Criminal Code of Canada to create offences around the intimidation, obstruction and interference of health care workers. The commission of such offences against a health care provider or against someone seeking to obtain such health services is to be treated by the courts as an aggravating sentencing factor, thus giving the courts specific directions at the time of sentencing.

Since the start of the pandemic, we have seen a more urgent need to protect those who care for our loved ones when they are defenceless in the face of illness. The stress that accumulates around health care professionals in the best of times is overwhelming, and we must have the full weight of the law behind us to stop intimidation, obstruction and interference as they work tirelessly to do their jobs. Working without the threat of intimidation should be the most basic of rights that we afford to the most valuable assets of our health care system.

We need to thank our health care workers with actions, not words. Even though the changes Bill C-3 seeks to address within the Criminal Code are not a new problem, we must send the bill to committee for further study and modifications to try to better protect our health care workers and patients. I am aware the Criminal Code already covers similar offences, such as intimidation, harassment, assault and incitement of violence, so if the courts already have authority and responsibility to assess the severity of the crime in sentencing, what are we really hoping to achieve?

Believe me, no one wishes more than I do that we ensure the safety of our medical professionals and reduce the stress they may endure. However, will this legislative tool help? We will not know unless we send it to committee to study it further and, if need be, amend it.

Recently I was sent the stories of 40 health care workers from central Alberta. What stood out was the number of times the words “stress”, “harassment”, “overworked”, “burnout” and “anxiety” were used as they spoke about their work environments. If the pandemic is to teach us anything, it is that we must look in depth at the giant holes we have in our system, holes that fail to protect the people who help us navigate our health care needs. More than ever, we see the importance of studying the protections already outlined in the Criminal Code and discussing the consequences of those harassing and vilifying patients and workers.

With respect to the need to protest, it cannot come at the expense of our health care workers and patients. We cannot allow threats and bullying to limit access for those seeking and providing health care. We must study the bill at length and make sure we can strike a balance between our right to be heard and our right to be safe.

Getting to know so many nurses, doctors and staff motivated me to follow in my father's footsteps as the chairman of the Elnora General Hospital board. I speak from both my heart and my experience when I express the need for this bill to be sent to committee, as it is crucial that unintended consequences of potential laws are investigated.

There has always been an ongoing debate about omnibus legislation and, sadly, this bill is a shining example of how this process can sometimes be abused. However, we cannot let this technicality limit the wide-reaching potential the bill has and interfere with opportunities for debate and scrutiny. We must not lose sight of the one basic principle which ties together all of the proposed enactments: the principle that our health care professionals deserve more.

I want to thank Sarah, a registered nurse providing care for patients in rural Alberta hospitals. She reached out to say that she did her very best throughout every single understaffed, overworked, stressful mandated shift, even when supplied with inadequate PPE. We owe Sarah our very best for further scrutiny of Bill C-3.

Although she wishes to remain anonymous, my gratitude goes out to a registered nurse of 22 years who currently works at the Red Deer Regional Hospital Centre. She expressed that the last 18 months have been eye-opening, heartbreaking and exhausting. However, despite the difficult year, she has never wavered from her work at the labour and delivery unit. Not once did she put her fears and needs above those of her patients.

I also thank Suzanne, who told me that being hired as a social worker at the Red Deer Regional Hospital Centre was one of the proudest moments in her life. Despite the unprecedented stress and anxiety she faces, she still loves her job as much as the first day she started.

These are the stories of the heroes we could honour and further study with this bill. These are the voices that encourage me to stand here today and speak. As I mentioned earlier, I know from a profound personal place the importance of caring for those who care for us. We must ensure their safety and reduce the stress and anxiety that our medical professionals endure. It is time to send Bill C-3 to committee so that we can vet it at every possible stage.

In closing, I once again thank you, Madam Speaker, for your service and for allowing me to thank the people who are most special to me. I thank you for letting me highlight the health care professionals who took the time to share their stories.

I hope that as parliamentarians we can look for common-sense solutions to the potential overreach and unintended consequences regarding places where medical services are provided. I also hope the well-being of all involved is taken into consideration so that our doctors and nurses can concentrate on the myriad diseases and conditions that are taking their toll on the physical and mental health challenges facing society today.

We must remember who we are fighting for and that they have never failed in fighting for us in our times of need. Health care workers may be human by birth, but they are heroes by choice.

The House resumed consideration of the motion that Bill C-3, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Canada Labour Code, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Business of the House

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons (Senate)]

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour today to rise to speak to Bill C-3, very important legislation that covers two aspects of providing for our health care workers, especially during this pandemic.

The latter half of the bill specifically addresses the issue of paid sick leave and how important it is to ensure that people do not have to choose between paying their bills and going to work. When people are sick, as we have learned through this pandemic, we do not want them going to work and participating in an environment where they could potentially be passing along illness to other people. When we are sick or do not feel well, it is important we stay home. To that end, we need the proper legislation in place to protect workers and give them that flexibility so they can take the proper measures to protect themselves.

The other part of the bill, which I will focus a little more on, specifically ensures that proper measures are put into our Criminal Code to protect individuals from being harassed on their way to and from work, in particular, health care professionals. When the bill was introduced, I was extremely happy to hear about the measures that would be put in place.

There was an extremely unfortunate incident at Kingston General Hospital at the beginning of the election campaign, when protests were gaining speed and traction. A group of people chose to protest not just in front of Kingston General Hospital, but right in front of the cancer clinic at the hospital. Folks going to receive their cancer treatments and then leaving were being harassed by a protest group that yelled insults. In addition, those serving on the front line, the nurses and doctors, were being harassed as they were going in and out of the hospital. It is absolutely ridiculous that we even need to have this debate or that we have a requirement for legislation. However, unfortunate incidents have been popping up, such as the one most recently in my community of Kingston and the Islands.

Perhaps it was the nature of the election taking place at the time that really added fuel to the fire. The unfortunate part about the campaign was that it was taking a political lens. The People's Party of Canada was really promoting this event. People's Party of Canada signs were in front of the hospital during this protest. By and large, on Twitter, it was the People's Party and its supporters who were promoting this event to take place. Of course, they did it all in the name of civil liberties, believing that somehow liberties had been breached during the pandemic, which I find extremely alarming.

Even though the People's Party did not win any seats in this place, I still find it concerning when members of the House attempt to play footsies with the issue of civil liberties being in jeopardy during the pandemic. Unfortunately, I am reminded of the more recently formed Conservative liberties caucus, the freedom fighters caucus, whatever it is called, which consists of approximately 15 to 30 Conservative members of Parliament and senators, who somehow find it their job to stand up for the liberties that have been infringed upon during the pandemic. I believe that every person in the House believes strongly that people are entitled to certain rights afforded them under the charter and that, indeed, no person's rights have been infringed upon during the pandemic. However, this is not the way it is being interpreted. When leaders are helping to fuel the fire through their actions and words, it only further instills within the people who are leading these protests to go out there, to charge and suggest they somehow need to be protected.

We end up with what I described in my riding of Kingston and the Islands in front of the Kingston General Hospital: an event where there were about 50 people yelling, screaming and hurling insults and accusations toward not just health care professionals, the nurses and the doctors coming and going from the hospital, but indeed people entering the cancer clinic at Kingston General Hospital and people who were leaving immediately following treatments.

Members can imagine the public outcry against this type of activity that was going on. It was quite a bit, and there was a lot of anger and frustration from the community, but at the same time it provided an opportunity for a certain degree of empowerment in this group.

This legislation specifically seeks to make this type of activity something that is not permissible in the Criminal Code and indeed that people can be held accountable for. I am extremely happy to see this legislation that we committed to during the election come forward so quickly. I want to see this get to committee as quickly as possible so it can be properly studied. As I have been listening to the debate today, some of my colleagues have raised questions about the content of the bill and how that will be affected. I think back to the previous question from the NDP member, and these are good questions and things to study at committee, where we can hash out the details to ensure that this legislation is the best it can be.

The reality of Bill C-3 is that it is a commitment to Canadians. It is a commitment that we will not tolerate this kind of behaviour around health care facilities that are providing services. The frontline workers are there to provide services to our communities. We will not allow people to participate in activities that intimidate, harass or threaten their ability to move freely in and out of such a facility in order to provide these frontline services.

I know I am close to question period and I am happy to begin my five minutes of questions, but I want to say I am very glad the bill is before us. I want it to move quickly to committee so it can be thoroughly examined and reported back to the House and we can pass it into legislation.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to zero in on something that has not been discussed yet on Bill C-3. As I have been able to state previously, I am very supportive of protecting our wonderful nurses and health care workers.

I want to focus on another aspect of sentencing, which is the flexibility that a judge will have. I noticed some commentary in the media that this may be too harsh a way to protect our nurses by having as much as a 10-year sentence.

I wonder if the hon. member could comment on the fact that the judge will have a lot of discretion. It can be an offence by summary conviction. It can also be an indictable offence of up to 10 years. There are no mandatory minimums here.

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Kingston and the Islands.

Let me start by acknowledging what an important day today is. It is a day of action to end violence against women, and I recognize all the women who have died in Canada and around the world and the incredible women who continue to fight each and every day. As a society, we have a long way to go to end violence against women, but it is a day for us to redouble our efforts in this regard.

I am glad to speak today to Bill C-3, an act to amend the Criminal Code and the Canada Labour Code. I will be speaking primarily about the amendments to the Criminal Code of Canada.

The last 19 months or so have been difficult for frontline workers, particularly those in the health care sector. They have been working around the clock to help Canadians get through the pandemic. In many ways they have been putting their families at risk and have been away from their families during this period. We are very grateful for their service.

In my home community of Scarborough, I know that members of the Scarborough Health Network and those at the TAIBU Community Health Centre and many other local organizations have been instrumental in supporting us. However, sadly, the work of many of our frontline workers, especially those in the health care sector, has been the brunt of a great number of issues over the past few months, and I want to speak to that. I believe the amendments that are proposed today would address this.

It should be a fundamental right to go to work free of harassment and free of any form of disruption by the public, but sadly, because of anti-vaxxers and many others, health care workers are scared to go to work. I have been able to speak to many nurses, PSWs and physicians who are at their wit's end. They are stressed and are going on leave or are considering it because they can no longer bear what is happening to them.

I think all members would agree that it is unsettling to see reports in the media of bullying, threats, violence and intimidation directed toward health care workers and those seeking care. I was shocked to see reports of individuals in Canada using online platforms to incite others to shoot health care service providers who vaccinate children. Let me be clear: Such conduct is criminal and has no place in our society.

This past weekend I was able to get my second daughter vaccinated. She had her first dose. It was administered by Dr. Jaya, who has been at the forefront of the fight against COVID. I know she and her colleagues want to work in an environment where they are free and safe. We are very thankful for what they have done so far.

Bill C-3 seeks to provide enhanced protections to health care workers and those seeking care at a time when the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic is ongoing. Unimpeded access to health services is critical to moving Canada beyond the pandemic. As Ontario right now has reached the important 90% mark of vaccination for those over the age of 12, it is more important than ever that we extend these protections to all Canadians who are working in the health care sector.

While Bill C-3 would create two new offences in the Criminal Code, namely a new specific intimidation offence and an offence of obstructing access to health care facilities, I want to focus my remarks today on the sentencing amendments advanced in the bill that relate to the proposed aggravating factors.

In short, aggravating factors are facts present in any given case that increase the gravity of the offence or the offender's degree of responsibility. Existing Criminal Code examples include when an offence is motivated by hate or prejudice and when an offender abuses a position of trust. To arrive at a fit sentence when sentencing, the court must weigh all aggravating and mitigating factors present in the case at hand.

Before speaking to these proposed legislative changes in more detail, I want to provide some additional context in relation to the sentencing amendments being advanced.

In 2019, the House of Commons Standing Committee on Health studied the prevalence of violence faced by health care workers in Canada. It reported that the rate of workplace violence against health care workers was four times higher than any other profession. What is particularly alarming about this figure is that stakeholders in this area also reported that most of the violence that workers experienced remained unreported due to a culture of acceptance.

In its report entitled “Violence Facing Health Care Workers in Canada”, the House of Commons Standing Committee on Health made several recommendations, including that the Government of Canada amend the Criminal Code to require courts to treat an assault against a health care sector worker as an aggravating factor for sentencing. In advancing this recommendation, the committee heard testimony from the Canadian Federation of Nurses Union that such an amendment would serve as a deterrent for individuals perpetrating violence against health care workers.

The sentencing amendments in Bill C-3 would respond to the long-standing calls from health care sector stakeholders and to the recommendation of the committee to codify assaulting health care practitioners, who are acting in the course of their duties, as an aggravating factor at sentencing and would reflect the common law in this area.

Let me take a moment to explain why. Existing sentencing laws already provide sentencing courts with the broad discretion to account for all relevant aggravating and mitigating factors in determining a sentence that is proportionate, having regard to the gravity of the offence and degree of responsibility of the offender. The list of aggravating factors provided in section 7(1)(a)(ii) of the Criminal Code is not exhaustive and courts can, and do, expand the list by recognizing new aggravating and mitigating factors at sentencing. In fact, reported cases in Canada have already recognized assaulting persons working in the health care system as an aggravating circumstance at sentencing.

Consistent with this existing treatment by courts, Bill C-3 would create two new aggravating factors applicable in the health care context, which would apply when a person is being sentenced for any criminal offence.

The proposed measures in the bill would include an aggravating factor where the offence was committed against any person who, in the performance of their duties and functions, was providing health services. The concept of health services would not be defined in the bill, but the courts would have the flexibility to apply it in appropriate cases. The aggravating factors also make clear that personal care services are captured within the concept of health services for aggravating factors.

Personal support workers provide health services that are essential to the well-being of all patients. The House of Commons Standing Committee on Health reported that an alarming 89% of all personal support workers had experienced physical violence on the job based on a poll commissioned by the Ontario Council of Hospital Unions. Codifying this aggravating factor signals Parliament's view that criminal conduct directed at personal support workers must be recognized and denounced.

There is a great deal more I could say on this issue, but I want to emphasize that this is important legislation that stands up for health care workers who are essential for Canadian society to recover and thrive, especially during a global pandemic. This bill is long overdue and delivers on an important commitment the government made to Canadians.

For all the reasons identified above, I urge all members of the House to support the swift passage of Bill C-3.

[Denis Trudel, Bloc, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her fine speech and I congratulate her.

We are currently in the midst of a serious housing crisis. In Quebec alone, 500,000 households are in core housing need. In addition, we have a global climate crisis hanging over our heads, and there are some really significant issues related to the health care crisis. For example, we need to overhaul the way the health care system is funded.

In addition, we are experiencing a major language crisis in Canada. We are not talking about this issue yet, but it will be addressed in the House soon, I hope. In Quebec, we are witnessing a major decline in the French language. In short, these are all very important issues that we should be tackling now.

I would like my colleague to talk a little bit about the appropriateness of talking about Bill C‑3 here today, when there are so many other pressing issues that we could be discussing.

[Louise Chabot, Bloc, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would first like to inform you that I will be sharing my time with my esteemed colleague from Beauport—Limoilou.

Furthermore, as today is December 6, the 32nd anniversary of the tragic Polytechnique massacre, in which 14 women were killed just for being women, I would like to offer my support and solidarity and say that we remember.

Let us return now to Bill C‑3, which is currently under consideration. This is a two-pronged bill: it amends the Canada Labour Code, and it amends the Criminal Code. These two statutes do not address the same issues.

What we do know about this bill is that it stems from a commitment the government made during the last election campaign, the one that should not have happened. During that campaign, the government stated that it wanted to increase the number of sick days for workers who have none and strengthen the Criminal Code with more severe penalties for people who impede the provision of health care or intimidate health care workers.

Since we are talking about two jurisdictions here, and since this bill will definitely be worth studying in committee, I am wondering which would be the best committee to study it.

The government thought it would be a good idea to significantly strengthen the measures set out in the Criminal Code that penalize people who intimidate or harass patients and health care workers, but is that the right solution to this problem?

We will need to examine this bill to be able to answer that question properly. We understand the purpose of the measure, which is to make it clear to health care workers and those who need access to medical care that we will never allow them to be intimidated or afraid to get care. I think everyone understands the message, which may have been necessary.

However, as a health care worker myself, even though it has been some time since I worked in the field, what I am wondering is whether our labour laws, our workplace health and safety laws, also protect the workplace from acts of violence, intimidation and harassment.

Perhaps that should have been considered. Besides the incidents that we all witnessed in Quebec and the provinces, the major unions have been long calling for stronger measures against violence, intimidation and harassment to be included in our labour laws, because employers also have an obligation to provide a safe workplace.

In Quebec, anti-vaxxers have protested in front of primary schools. They have also protested to a lesser extent in front of hospitals and vaccination clinics. The Government of Quebec did not wait for the federal government before it significantly increased fines and public safety measures. That is why we wonder if strengthening the Criminal Code is the right solution.

The Canadian Labour Congress made it clear, and we agree, that we must avoid depriving individuals of the fundamental right to associate, to unionize, to strike, to picket and to mobilize. It is a major right guaranteed by the Constitution, and we must ensure that it is included in this bill.

As for the Canada Labour Code, the Minister of Labour stated in his speech on Friday that there are gaps in the social safety net. That is not news. Canada's antiquated labour laws are sorely in need of attention. Fifty-eight percent, or 580,000, of Canada's workers do not have paid leave, and it is time to give them 10 days of paid sick leave. We could also amend the Canada Labour Code to increase the minimum wage as the government promised in the last budget. That would send a clear message in the current circumstances that we are protecting workers, who should have good working conditions and good wages.

Speaking of gaps in the social safety net, the government has forgotten one important aspect, namely, the employment insurance system. I am thinking specifically of people who are sick. The government is failing thousands of people who have no paid sick leave, no wage loss program and only 15 weeks of sickness benefits. This really is a gap in the social safety net.

Why is the government introducing a bill that targets the Canada Labour Code and the Criminal Code, which are two different systems, rather than strengthening labour laws and the EI system to protect people who are sick and have nothing to fall back on when they become seriously ill?

Why did the government not ensure that the constitutional right to protest and to freedom of expression were properly protected in the Criminal Code, if that were its intention? It will be important to study those two matters in committee.

We support the bill in principle, with a bit of fine-tuning.

[David Lametti, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for the question. It is always a pleasure to work with him on different projects, including on medical assistance in dying.

In a democracy, it is always important to canvass the people directly. That is what we do when we have an election. We have a Westminster parliamentary system, and it has been working well for Canada and the provinces for years. Elections are part of that system.

I can assure my colleague that we will work hard on Bill C-3 and on all of our common goals in other areas, such as medical assistance in dying, which we want to improve by taking another look at what we did in 2016 and 2020. I can assure my colleague that we are here to work together.

[Luc Thériault, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Quebec government did not wait for the Liberal government to pass a law to deal with these types of protests held near institutions. That said, I would be remiss if I did not remind my distinguished colleague of the reason why we find ourselves discussing Bill C-3 about two weeks before Christmas.

Earlier, the government referred to the 2019 report from the Standing Committee on Health on violence faced by health care workers. The report, issued two years ago, pointed out that seven out of 10 workers were experiencing deteriorating mental health. The fear and intimidation is only going to worsen their situation if they return to the system.

We are clearly in favour of the principle of such a bill. However, why do we find ourselves today with a government that called an election, dragged its feet on recalling Parliament after the election, and consequently delayed other very important bills, in particular the bill in memory of Émilie Sansfaçon, which sought to give people with cancer up to 50 weeks of EI sickness benefits?

This also had an impact on the work of the Special Joint Committee on Physician-Assisted Dying. It had one year to submit its report, but it will have barely four months to discuss such a critical issue. Does my colleague not find it hard to be part of a government that puts off critical and important problems like these?

[David Lametti, Liberal, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, this is my first time rising in the House since the election, so it is my turn to thank the voters of LaSalle—Émard—Verdun for placing their trust in me for the third time. I will do my best to represent them as their MP.

I would also like to draw everyone's attention to the fact that today is December 6. As a Montrealer, a Canadian and a Quebecker, the memory of what happened in Montreal on December 6 never fails to move me. Fourteen young female engineering students lost their lives. I will do my best to make sure nothing like that ever happens again.

I am pleased to speak at the second reading debate on Bill C-3, an act to amend the Criminal Code and the Canada Labour Code, which I introduced alongside the Minister of Labour last week. I will focus my remarks on the Criminal Code amendments contained in the bill.

I am proud of Bill C-3, but I will be honest. I am disappointed, as was the member for Saanich—Gulf Islands a moment ago, that we are having to propose criminal law reforms to explicitly protect health care workers and patients against intimidation and obstruction.

Since the start of the global pandemic 20 months ago, the health sector in Canada has faced unprecedented challenges. Health professionals have been working relentlessly and under extraordinarily difficult circumstances to save lives. A Statistics Canada survey revealed that seven in 10 health care workers reported worsening mental health due to the pandemic. However, that is only part of the story.

On top of the strain on mental health, our health professionals are also facing violence in the workplace.

Dr. Katharine Smart, president of the Canadian Medical Association, told Canadians, during a news conference on this bill, that preliminary results from the 2021 National Physician Health Survey suggested that three out of four physicians had experienced intimidation, bullying and harassment in the workplace. She went further to say, “one in three say that this happens regularly. This number jumps to 80% of female physicians.” These numbers are telling me a deeply disturbing story, especially when we look at the impact on people who identify as female in the health profession.

Most Canadians have shown tremendous respect for our health care workers and have followed the guidance of public health authorities. Unfortunately, a small number of individuals refuse to believe the authorities or follow evidence-based public health measures. An even smaller group has even uttered threats, including death threats. These people have also committed acts of violence against health workers who were simply doing their jobs by providing essential care to Canadians.

Violence against health care workers is a long-standing problem. Ever since the pandemic hit, health care workers have expressed concern about their ability to keep doing their jobs. Some have even been forced to quit. Moreover, people who need health care services have expressed similar concern about their ability to keep accessing health care facilities safely.

I cannot stress enough how disappointed I was to learn of this behaviour. There is simply no place in Canada for such conduct, and we will not tolerate it. The ability to express ourselves and to protest what we do not believe is right is a cherished freedom in this country, but Canadians understand the difference between expressing our views and threatening those we disagree with.

We have seen the consequences of this abuse. For example, Dr. Gretchen Roedde of Latchford, Ontario has decided to retire early due to online abuse. This small town could lose a doctor because of this kind of behaviour.

Shockingly, this abuse and harassment even extends to children. Nolan Blaszczyk, a seven-year-old boy, faced a torrent of verbal abuse when he went with his mother to get his vaccine. Abby Blaszczyk was told that she was murdering her son and she was committing genocide. How is this acceptable?

As everyone knows, the Criminal Code includes a broad range of general offences to protect all Canadians. The Criminal Code already prohibits some of the despicable behaviour we have seen over the past year, including assault, criminal harassment, intimidation and threats. Today we see just how urgent it is to go even further.

Enhancing these existing measures by explicitly prohibiting this conduct in the health care sector has become necessary and urgent.

During the recent election campaign, as COVID‑19-related protests began to intensify around health facilities, the Prime Minister committed to protecting our health care workers and ensuring all Canadians had access to health care without fear of threat or intimidation. The measures introduced in Bill C-3 would fully address these commitments and ensure a broad range of responses to various forms of harmful conduct facing the health sector.

The bill would create two new offences specific to the health context.

First, a new intimidation offence would be enacted to protect both health workers and health seekers. Intimidation is already criminalized as a general offence, but these amendments would give police and prosecutors additional tools to specifically protect our health care workers and users. Furthermore, they would provide for a higher maximum sentence for intimidation of 10 years. The current intimidation offence carries a maximum sentence of five years.

This new offence would extend to health care workers similar protections to those justice system participants, people like judges, jurors, witnesses, as well as journalists who report on organized crime. Intimidation is treated as a more serious offence when committed to impede them in their important functions.

That specific intimidation offence was created in response to a series of incidents in which prosecutors, witnesses and others were intimidated by criminal organizations to destabilize the criminal justice system. Similar to what we are doing now, Parliament's response then was to enhance criminal law protections for such intimidation with a distinct offence and an enhanced penalty. It is important to protect those who are working to improve our country, whether through the health care system or legal system.

The new intimidation offence would prohibit any act intended to promote fear in health care professionals in order to stop them from performing their professional duties. As noted above, this includes health care professionals working at abortion clinics, other frequent target of threats and intimidation. Anyone who works to assist health professionals in the performance of their duties would also be protected by the intimidation offence. Depending on the circumstances, this could be a professional support worker or clinic staff working alongside a physician or nurse.

It takes a community of health workers to deliver health services in our country, so those who assist health care professionals in carrying out their duties are rightly covered by this offence.

The proposed offence would also protect anyone seeking or receiving health care services. Any behaviour intended to incite fear in individuals seeking health care services, for the purpose of dissuading those individuals from obtaining services, would be expressly prohibited.

Creating this new offence will also allow us to increase the maximum penalty for this behaviour. The new offence will be a hybrid offence and will carry a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison, on indictment. This is a harsher penalty than the general offence of intimidation, which is five years.

Increasing the penalty in this way sends a very clear message that Parliament strongly condemns these forms of behaviour directed at the health sector.

There is another point that I want to be very clear about. The proposed intimidation offence can be committed in person or through electronic means, including social media and other online channels. Media outlets across the country are reporting that health care providers are being threatened and intimidated on social media. Medical associations, including the Canadian Medical Association and the Ontario Medical Association, have confirmed that threats and intimidation are occurring not only in person, but also online. The offence of intimidation would apply regardless of the means of communication.

In addition to protecting the heroes in the health care sector, the bill also creates a new offence that would prohibit intentionally obstructing or interfering with a person's ability to access a health facility. The offence would protect access to any and every place where health services are provided, including a hospital, a mobile clinic, an abortion clinic, a vaccine clinic, a doctor's office and even doctors' homes if that is where they provide their services. This new offence is hybrid and will carry a maximum penalty of 10 years of imprisonment.

I want to be very clear about one thing. Nothing in the proposed legislation would undermine workers' ability to strike or Canadians' ability to peacefully protest. Our government stands by the charter and the freedoms it guarantees, including freedom of speech and the right to strike. That is why this offence would expressly exclude communicative activity that remains peaceful and lawful, such as strike action or peaceful protest, even if it has a minor impact on access. Minor inconvenience for those seeking to get into buildings is a fair price to pay to protect our cherished liberties, but behaviour that is threatening or violent or that creates a major impediment to access is rightly criminalized. This is the current state of our criminal law and the bill would only enhance that.

The legislation provides for a definition of “health professional” to clarify the scope of the offences and how they are intended to be applied to police and prosecutors. A health professional would be defined as a person who is entitled, under the laws of a province or territory, to provide a health service, such as doctors or nurses. Given that the provinces and territories are responsible for the health sector and regulation of health professionals and services, the definition is intended to be broad and capable of being applied in accordance with each jurisdiction's health system.

I would now like to talk about the sentencing reforms in Bill C‑3. These changes address the concerns that health professionals have had for a while now, and, in fact, parliamentarians from all sides have presented similar reforms in the past through private members' bills.

The bill would require that, in cases where there is evidence showing that the offence was committed against a health care provider who was carrying out their duties, sentencing courts treat this evidence as an aggravating factor. Aggravating factors will also apply if the offence involved impeding another person from obtaining health services. Individuals on both sides of our health care system must be protected, meaning health care providers and their patients.

Support workers, also referred to as orderlies, are also vulnerable to violence in the workplace. Even though they are not regulated in many regions across the country like health professionals are, they still provide care and essential support to many Canadians. Therefore, the aggravating factors proposed in this bill expressly include personal care services.

These sentencing reforms are based on long-standing calls from stakeholders. Indeed, during our news conference following the introduction of the bill, the presidents of the CMA and the Canadian Federation of Nurses Unions affirmed the importance of these measures to our health workers.

The aggravating factors also implement a recommendation of the 2019 report conducted by the House of Commons Standing Committee on Health entitled “Violence Facing Health Care Workers in Canada”. The report requested the Government of Canada amend the Criminal Code to require a court to consider the fact that the victim of an assault is a health care sector worker to be an aggravating circumstance for the purposes of sentencing. The same report documented that health care workers have four times the rate of workplace violence than any other profession, despite most of this violence being unreported due to a culture of acceptance.

While the pandemic has created new challenges for health care workers and exacerbated the violence they face, as I mentioned before, those who provide abortion services and the women who access them have also experienced unacceptable threats and violence. It was not so long ago, in the 1990s, that several physicians in Canada were shot because of their work providing abortion services. Abortion clinics have been attacked and blocked. Those seek abortion services have been harassed, threatened and intimidated by individuals opposed to abortion. The safety and security of abortion health care workers and patients continue to be a troubling issue. Our government will protect abortion service providers alongside other health professionals. We support the rights of women to control their bodies and have unimpeded access to abortion services along with other health services.

I hope—like all members here today, I am sure—that health care workers will one day be able to do their jobs free from violence and can feel safe and valued when they are caring for us. The pandemic is not over, as we know, and neither is the need to protect our health care workers.

These workers play a very important role in the lives of all Canadians. Thanks to them, we have been able to fend off this devastating pandemic and make recovery plans for our society and our country. The proposed reforms will enhance existing measures in the Criminal Code and they have broad support within the medical community. For these reasons, I urge all members to support Bill C‑3, which is urgent, important and necessary.