An Act to amend the Criminal Code (assaults against persons who provide health services and first responders)

Sponsor

Todd Doherty  Conservative

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

Status

Third reading (Senate), as of Dec. 10, 2024

Subscribe to a feed (what's a feed?) of speeches and votes in the House related to Bill C-321.

Summary

This is from the published bill.

This enactment amends the Criminal Code to require a court to consider the fact that the victim of an assault is a person who provides health services or a first responder to be an aggravating circumstance for the purposes of sentencing.

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

Feb. 28, 2024 Passed 3rd reading and adoption of Bill C-321, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (assaults against persons who provide health services and first responders)
Jan. 31, 2024 Passed Concurrence at report stage of Bill C-321, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (assaults against health care professionals and first responders)
June 21, 2023 Passed 2nd reading of Bill C-321, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (assaults against health care professionals and first responders)

Criminal CodePrivate Members' Business

February 16th, 2024 / 1:45 p.m.


See context

Conservative

Todd Doherty Conservative Cariboo—Prince George, BC

Madam Speaker, it is interesting our hon. colleague brings up transit workers and the issue of violence against them when there is legislation in place that does already protect transit workers. Whereas, Bill C-321 needs to be passed to protect those who protect us.

Criminal CodePrivate Members' Business

February 16th, 2024 / 1:30 p.m.


See context

Conservative

Todd Doherty Conservative Cariboo—Prince George, BC

moved that Bill C-321, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (assaults against persons who provide health services and first responders), be read the third time and passed.

Madam Speaker, it is a great honour to rise once again in this chamber to speak to a bill that is near and dear to my heart. I rise today to speak on behalf of the hundreds and thousands of brave men and women who are our hometown heroes; they are our nurses, our health care workers, our firefighters, our paramedics, our first responders and our correctional officers.

Bill C-321, an act to amend the Criminal Code, assaults against persons who provide health services and first responders, would amend the Criminal Code by adding section 269.02, which would make an offence against a health care provider or first responder an aggravating factor upon sentencing. Our health care providers and first responders need to be assured that if they are attacked, assaulted or harassed while on the job, there is a strong legal mechanism in place to deliver them justice. As it stands today, that protection simply does not exist.

Bill C-321 would serve three main purposes: one, it would be a powerful deterrent to those who seek to commit violence against our frontline heroes; two, it would signal to frontline workers that we value them, that we are looking out for them and that the justice system will protect them; and three, it would help throw weight behind a national conversation that needs to be had to start making these workplaces safer. To put it more simply, Bill C-321 is about protecting those who protect us. The importance of this legislation cannot be overstated.

Our health care providers and our first responders truly are Canadian heroes. They put their lives and their personal safety on the line each and every day. How many people can say that same? We have fallen far when it is okay to hunt and to target firefighters, who are just trying to save lives; to hunt and to target nurses and paramedics, who are simply trying to provide care to the sick and wounded? These are our frontline heroes, and the reality is that they have to deal with these traumatic occurrences each and every day.

Firefighters, police officers, correctional officers, nurses and doctors put on their uniforms each and very day to serve us and our families. They do so knowing and expecting that they are going to face violence and harassment. They heal our wounds. They run into burning buildings. They run toward danger when others run away. They dedicate their lives to protecting us and those we love: our neighbours, our friends, our families. Who protects them? Right now, there is no one.

Everyone deserves a workplace free from violence and abuse. When one starts a career in health care or as a first responder, one does so to serve one's community and to make a difference. Nowhere in the job description does it say that one should be signing on for a life of violence, abuse and harassment. When did violence in the workplace every become the norm? We cannot tolerate this any longer. We have to act.

Many of our great men and women, nurses and paramedics, firefighters and correctional officers have shared their personal stories with me, and I am sure they have done the same with many of our colleagues as well. We cannot turn on the TV or scroll through social media without seeing yet another story of a violent attack on a paramedic or a nurse.

Recently, I visited a medical facility, and I witnessed the aftermath of a bloody assault on a nurse. It was horrible to see this young nurse absolutely battered. All that nurse was trying to do was to take the temperature of a patient. When I spoke with the supervisor of that particular nurse, I was told that it was the second incident of violence in a month. It is crazy how far we have fallen when our paramedics have to put on bulletproof vests just to start their shifts and to make it through a shift.

When we hear those stories we do not know how to respond. It is difficult to imagine the things they go through. It is hard to hear. What I know is that we need to act. We need to do everything in our power to make a difference in these heroes' lives. Whether they are a nurse, a personal care worker, a paramedic, a firefighter, a correctional officer or a psychiatric nurse who is simply performing their duties, they are all facing increasing rates of violence on a daily basis. We need them to know that they are cherished and that someone is looking out for them. We need them to know that there is somebody who is fighting for them.

We as parliamentarians can be their champions. We have the sole constitutional power to create law, and we must use that power to demonstrate to the world that in Canada, violence perpetrated against health care providers and first responders is unacceptable. We will not stand for it. On the contrary, we will stand firmly against it.

To anyone watching or listening right now, I urge them to go look back at the witness testimony from when Bill C-321 was at the justice committee. Some of the stories these brave paramedics, nurses and firefighters have shared with us were absolutely horrific. I would like to highlight some of the testimony for my colleagues here now.

Testimony from Dr. Elizabeth Donnelly, associate professor at the University of Windsor and a member of the violence in paramedicine research group reads:

Violence against paramedics is wildly under-reported, primarily due to a culture of under-reporting and this idea that tolerating violence has become an expected professional competency.

Violence reporting [has been slowly] increasing, and while it's still under-reported, our research has found that paramedics are reporting violence every 18 hours, are assaulted every 46 hours and experience violence that results in physical harm every nine days.

Linda Silas, President of the Canadian Federation of Nurses Union, said this:

The facts are shocking...In 2023, a pan-Canadian survey of nurses was done. Two-thirds reported incidents of physical assaults over the past year and 40% of those nurses reported physical abuse more than once a month while engaged in their duties.

She also said:

Exposure to violence predicts negative mental health outcomes, including PTSD...78.5% [of nurses] report symptoms of burnout. Similar data is seen with public safety personnel.

Danette Thomsen of the B.C. nurses union said:

What about the nurse in rural B.C. who, last January, entered a female patient's room and was attacked? Can you imagine being held over a chair, receiving punch after punch, with handfuls of your hair being pulled out, while waiting frantically for help to come from the RCMP?

Paul Hills, president of the Saskatoon Paramedics Association and a member of the International Association of Fire Fighters, speaking on the daily experience of paramedics across Canada, said this:

We normally start our 12-hour shift with a team briefing. We check our trucks and then it's go, go, go. We rarely have any breaks. That means no breakfast, no lunch and no supper as compared with the average worker, not to mention all while experiencing some of the most horrific and heart-wrenching situations that exist in society—incidents involving children being stabbed by their parents, or families tragically dying in motor vehicle [accidents].

He went on:

Personally, I've had my life and those of my family threatened by gang members. I've had machetes and knives pulled on me. I've removed guns from patients while attending to their medical needs.

Mr. Hills continued:

In Toronto just two weeks ago, a firefighter attempting to put out a fire in an encampment was attacked with a six-foot piece of PVC piping and hit in the face for no reason whatsoever.

In British Columbia, interactions with overdose patients have become violent or aggressive once we've rendered medical care to save their lives.

In Winnipeg, a firefighter got stabbed in the back while attending to a patient on a sidewalk.

I could spend the rest of the hour sharing real-life events—my partner here could as well—of violent acts or near misses, but the takeaway is that it's real. It's happening right now.

If that is not enough evidence, I am not sure what is, but the violence that our health care providers and first responders face on a daily basis has hidden consequences that go beyond the physical risks. There is a growing body of research showing that increased violence is correlated to higher rates of depression, anxiety, stress, suicidal ideation and burnout.

Critically, exposure to on-the-job violence has been strongly identified with a rising intent to leave the job. We live in a time when we need our health care providers and first responders more than ever, but our nurses, paramedics, firefighters and more are looking to leave their jobs rather than continuing to suffer the abuse they experience. The violence and abuse they constantly face leads to fear, to fatigue and to burnout; and it leads to serious morale and recruitment issues. Why would they not want to leave? How are employers going to recruit somebody with that type of job description, under those conditions? Why should we expect people to keep fighting, day in and day out, for us, with no thanks and no appreciation, if we cannot fight for them?

Our frontline heroes need our support. They need recognition. They need our help. Bill C-321 is the necessary first step to work toward those goals. Many parties have a role to play in addressing this crisis, and those actors and those parties need to step up to the plate. Talk is cheap. As parliamentarians, we are limited in offering solutions, but what we can do we should do. We can do our part by amending the Criminal Code and passing Bill C-321 into law now. I do not think it is a controversial debate. We all want to come together on this in a non-partisan fashion to get things done for our health care providers and our first responders.

We have already heard speeches and witness testimonies that Bill C-321 is complementary to the changes made in the earlier Bill C-3, and we know that Bill C-321 came out of the 2019 HESA recommendations from the report on violence against first responders. We know that the relevant stakeholder groups are overwhelmingly supportive of this legislation. If the status quo on an assault charge were a sufficient deterrent, this debate would be irrelevant, but clearly, as so many witnesses have testified before the justice committee, there is nothing currently in the law that acts as a strong enough deterrent for the increasing rates of violence experienced by health care providers and first responders.

That is why the International Association of Fire Fighters has publicly and vocally supported the legislation, and it is far from the only one. The Canadian Association of Fire Chiefs, the Paramedic Association of Canada, the Ambulance Paramedics of British Columbia, the Union of Canadian Correctional Officers, the Ontario Paramedic Association, the Paramedic Chiefs of Canada, the Manitoba Association of Fire Chiefs, the Saskatoon Paramedic Association, the British Columbia Nurses' Union and the Canadian Federation of Nurses Unions have all thrown their considerable weight behind this bill. It is imperative that we listen to what these stakeholders are telling us. They are asking us for help, and they are asking us to work toward a solution together.

There are countless regional, provincial, national and international organizations that have come on board, and we know that the Canadian public is highly supportive of this initiative as well, as was reported from an Abacus Data poll conducted in November, which showed that 83% of Canadians support making assault against health care providers and first responders a more serious offence in the Criminal Code.

We must take this first step toward showing our frontline heroes that we hear them, that we are here for them, that we value them immensely, that we will always have their backs, that we appreciate them and that we will fight to protect them. That is our duty. Our health care providers and our first responders need to know that Parliament, the House of elected officials and, more important, the justice system have their backs and will not let them slip through the cracks any longer.

Criminal CodePrivate Members' Business

January 31st, 2024 / 5:05 p.m.


See context

The Deputy Speaker Chris d'Entremont

The House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the motion at report stage of Bill C-321, under Private Members' Business.

The House resumed from December 15, 2023, consideration of the motion that Bill C-321, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (assaults against persons who provide health services and first responders), as reported (with amendments) from the committee, be concurred in.

The House proceeded to the consideration of Bill C‑321, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (assaults against health care professionals and first responders), as reported (with amendments) from the committee.

The Chair Liberal Lena Metlege Diab

Mr. Caputo, that was the reason we scheduled both Bill C-321, which I reported on yesterday, clause-by-clause having been successfully concluded at this committee, and Bill C-40. Those two needed to be dealt with and were on the order of business to be concluded.

It didn't make any difference to the minister's availability and his appearances as to which date he appeared, because as long as he appears..., and I'm sure he's still willing to appear.

If we can continue with our business and do what we need to do, I am sure we can call him again to appear.

Justice and Human RightsCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

December 6th, 2023 / 5:15 p.m.


See context

Liberal

Lena Metlege Diab Liberal Halifax West, NS

Madam Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, two reports from the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights.

The first is the 17th report of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights in relation to Bill C-321, an act to amend the Criminal Code, assaults against health care professionals and first responders. The committee has studied the bill and has decided to report the bill back to the House with amendments.

The second is the 18th report of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights, and is about a motion adopted by the committee on Tuesday, December 5, 2023. It is entitled “Measures to Protect Canadians”.

Élisabeth Brière Liberal Sherbrooke, QC

Thank you, Madam Chair.

In terms of consistency, I just want to point out that the proposed wording in Bill C‑321 reflects the wording in subsection 269.01(1) of the Criminal Code, which states that the court “shall consider as an aggravating circumstance the fact that the victim was a public transit operator.” We're keeping the same wording.

Tako Van Popta Conservative Langley—Aldergrove, BC

Thank you.

Bill C-321, which we are considering today, amends the Criminal Code by adding section 269.02. I thought I would take a look at what section 269.01 says. It's already existing. It's about judges taking into consideration that the victim is a public transit operator. The language that is being proposed in the bill that is before us today mirrors almost exactly the language of existing section 269.01, which definitely uses the term “shall”: “it shall consider as an aggravating circumstance”.

I think that, just for the sake of consistency with the existing legislation, we need to stay with the original wording of Bill C-321 as it is before us today.

Rhéal Fortin Bloc Rivière-du-Nord, QC

I want to move a subamendment, Madam Chair. It has been distributed to the committee members. It would replace the word “shall” with “may”.

We heard from Justin Mausz, an advanced care paramedic. He completed his Ph.D. and he works as a clinician‑scientist and professor in the department of family and community medicine at the University of Toronto. Mr. Mausz seems qualified to address the issues concerning Bill C‑321.

When he came to speak, I asked him the following question:

Do you think the bill would still be helpful if it said that the court “may consider as an aggravating circumstance”, instead of “shall consider”? That way, the judge would have the discretion to determine whether it should be considered as an aggravating circumstance in a particular case.

Mr. Mausz responded: “Yes, absolutely.” I won't read you his entire response, but he finished with the following statement: “I always think context is important in decisions that must be approached with seriousness.”

It's a good idea, in probably 95% of cases, to consider as an aggravating circumstance the fact that the assaulted individual was a health care professional. However, there may be circumstances where this doesn't apply. Mr. Mausz gave the example of a person who, under the influence of adrenaline during an accident, I believe, reacted by saying something like “I'm going to kill you.” Everyone knew that this person wasn't violent, that his words weren't sincere and that the reaction was simply the result of the circumstances and adrenaline. Everyone recognized this, including the paramedic. In these types of cases, the judge hearing the evidence must have some leeway to determine whether this constitutes an aggravating circumstance. If the judge finds otherwise, the judge shouldn't feel obligated to consider it an aggravating circumstance in the sentencing process.

In keeping with the evidence heard and in the interest of fairness, I think that we should replace “shall” with “may”.

The Chair Liberal Lena Metlege Diab

I call this meeting to order.

Welcome, everyone.

Welcome to meeting 86 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights.

Pursuant to the order of reference adopted by the House on June 21, 2023, the committee is continuing its study of Bill C-321, an act to amend the Criminal Code on assaults against health care professionals and first responders.

Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format, pursuant to the Standing Orders. Members are attending in person and remotely using Zoom. Those who are on Zoom have already been tested and everything seems to be okay.

As it's only colleagues who are on Zoom, I assume that by now you all know the procedure for raising your hand and speaking. I won't go through all of that formally.

The sound checks have been successfully completed.

Here with us today, to help with our study of the clause-by-clause, we have, from the Department of Justice, Mr. Matthias Villetorte, senior counsel and team leader, criminal law policy section; and Ms. Leah Burt, counsel, criminal law policy section. Welcome.

I have a few remarks and I will be very brief. As the name indicates, this is an examination of all the clauses, in the order in which they appear in the bill. I will call each clause successively, and each clause is subject to debate and a vote.

If there is an amendment to the clause in question, I will recognize the member proposing it, who may explain it. The amendment will then be open for debate. When no further members wish to intervene, the amendment will be voted on. Amendments will be considered in the order in which they appear in the bill or in the package that each member received from the clerk. Members should note that amendments must be submitted in writing to the clerk of the committee.

I'll go slowly. There is not a lot going on this afternoon.

During debate on an amendment, members are permitted to move subamendments. These subamendments must be submitted in writing. They do not require the approval of the mover of the amendment. Only one subamendment may be considered at a time, and that subamendment cannot be amended. When a subamendment is moved to an amendment, it is voted on first, and then another subamendment may be moved or the committee may consider the main amendment and vote on it.

Of course, at the end, once it's all done, the committee will vote on the title and an order to reprint the bill if amendments are adopted. Finally, the committee will have to order the chair to report the bill to the House.

We'll begin.

Pursuant to Standing Order 75(1), consideration of the preamble is postponed.

(On clause 1)

On amendment G-1, I see that Mr. Maloney wishes to move it.

Is there any discussion on it?

The Chair Liberal Lena Metlege Diab

Thank you very much to both of our witnesses.

Thank you for appearing from North Carolina, and thank you to our witness appearing in person from Ottawa.

Colleagues, thank you very much. Have a lovely evening.

I will remind you that our next meeting is on Thursday, November 30, which is the last day of the month. We will be doing clause-by-clause on Bill C-321.

Thank you very much. Have a nice afternoon.

Todd Doherty Conservative Cariboo—Prince George, BC

I have 30 seconds.

I just want to again thank our guests who are here today. Your membership, and the firefighters, the paramedics and all of those who have shared their very emotional stories with me.... You can't help but be impacted by these stories.

I hope we'll do you right by passing Bill C-321—hopefully soon. I know the industry will share that message. It provides another vehicle to share the message that violence against our health care workers and first responders is not okay and it's not part of the job description.

Todd Doherty Conservative Cariboo—Prince George, BC

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you to my colleagues for allowing me to sit in on this, and thank you to our guests.

Ms. Silas and Danette, Bill C-321 came out of conversations we had, very honest and very frank conversations, earlier on when we were dealing with my bill, Bill C-211, on PTSD.

I have the questions and I have the backgrounder that Mr. Fortin was looking for. I will send that information to the committee.

I don't want to take up any more time trying to answer your question, Mr. Fortin. I will get you the information that I have. I'll send it through my colleague here.

I think what we need to hear more of is the voices of our guests who are here. I spoke to a group of nurses in northern B.C. two years ago at the invitation of Ms. Thomsen. When I mentioned the proposal of this bill, it brought tears to nurses around the room. It was a very emotional time.

Through you, Madam Chair, I would like to ask our guests this question: Why does just talking about the proposal of this bill evoke so much emotion with your membership?

Rhéal Fortin Bloc Rivière-du-Nord, QC

There is no disagreement there.

Sorry to cut you off, but I have just about a minute left.

The existing provision in the Criminal Code refers to a person providing health services. The bill currently before the committee, Bill C‑321, captures health care professionals and first responders. The Criminal Code already covers people who provide health services, including personal care services.

They seem to do the same thing. I could be wrong, but I'd really like to hear your thoughts on that.