The House is on summer break, scheduled to return Sept. 15

An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act

This bill is from the 44th Parliament, 1st session, which ended in January 2025.

Sponsor

David Lametti  Liberal

Status

This bill has received Royal Assent and is now law.

Summary

This is from the published bill. The Library of Parliament has also written a full legislative summary of the bill.

This enactment amends the Criminal Code and the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act to, among other things, repeal certain mandatory minimum penalties, allow for a greater use of conditional sentences and establish diversion measures for simple drug possession offences.

Similar bills

C-22 (43rd Parliament, 2nd session) An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act
C-236 (43rd Parliament, 2nd session) An Act to amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (evidence-based diversion measures)
C-236 (43rd Parliament, 1st session) An Act to amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (evidence-based diversion measures)

Elsewhere

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

Bill numbers are reused for different bills each new session. Perhaps you were looking for one of these other C-5s:

C-5 (2025) Law One Canadian Economy Act
C-5 (2020) Law An Act to amend the Bills of Exchange Act, the Interpretation Act and the Canada Labour Code (National Day for Truth and Reconciliation)
C-5 (2020) An Act to amend the Judges Act and the Criminal Code
C-5 (2016) An Act to repeal Division 20 of Part 3 of the Economic Action Plan 2015 Act, No. 1

Votes

June 15, 2022 Passed 3rd reading and adoption of Bill C-5, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act
June 15, 2022 Failed Bill C-5, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (recommittal to a committee)
June 13, 2022 Passed Concurrence at report stage of Bill C-5, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act
June 13, 2022 Failed Bill C-5, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (report stage amendment)
June 9, 2022 Passed Time allocation for Bill C-5, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act
March 31, 2022 Passed 2nd reading of Bill C-5, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act
March 30, 2022 Passed Time allocation for Bill C-5, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act

Debate Summary

line drawing of robot

This is a computer-generated summary of the speeches below. Usually it’s accurate, but every now and then it’ll contain inaccuracies or total fabrications.

Bill C-5 aims to amend the Criminal Code and the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act by repealing certain mandatory minimum penalties, especially for drug-related and some firearm-related offences, with the goal of addressing over-incarceration of indigenous people, Black Canadians, and marginalized communities. It also seeks to increase the availability of conditional sentencing orders for non-violent offenders who do not pose a risk to public safety, allowing them to serve their sentences in the community under certain conditions. Additionally, the bill encourages police and prosecutors to consider alternatives to criminal charges for simple drug possession, focusing on diversion to treatment programs.

Liberal

  • Addresses over-incarceration: Bill C-5 seeks to address the overrepresentation of indigenous people, Black Canadians, and marginalized communities in the criminal justice system, which is a key goal of the Liberal Party in reforming the justice system.
  • Repeal mandatory minimum penalties: The bill aims to repeal mandatory minimum penalties (MMP) for certain offenses, particularly drug-related and some firearm-related offenses, as these have disproportionately impacted indigenous and Black communities. MMPs will remain for serious violent crimes like murder.
  • Increase conditional sentences: Bill C-5 would increase the availability of conditional sentencing orders (CSO) for offenders who do not pose a public safety risk, allowing them to serve sentences in the community under strict conditions while accessing support systems. Restrictions on CSOs imposed by the previous Conservative government would be lifted.
  • Prioritize treatment over charges: The bill requires police and prosecutors to consider alternatives to laying charges for simple drug possession, such as warnings or diversion to addiction treatment programs. The government wants to address substance use as a health issue.
  • Restores judicial discretion: The bill seeks to restore judicial discretion in sentencing, which was limited by previous Conservative government policies. This discretion allows judges to consider individual circumstances and impose appropriate sentences, with the goal of ensuring fairness and compassion.

Conservative

  • Opposes the bill: Conservative members strongly oppose Bill C-5, criticizing it as a 'soft-on-crime' approach that would reduce punishments and accountability for perpetrators of violent gun crimes and drug dealers, thus endangering communities.
  • Weakening firearm penalties: The bill eliminates mandatory minimum sentences for serious firearm offenses, such as robbery with a firearm and weapons trafficking, which undermines efforts to combat gun violence and protect communities.
  • Soft on drug trafficking: The bill eliminates mandatory minimum sentences for drug trafficking and related offenses, which members argue will worsen the opioid crisis and harm those struggling with addiction by allowing drug dealers to operate with less accountability.
  • Conditional sentences risk: Expanding the use of conditional sentences, such as house arrest, for serious offenses like kidnapping and sexual assault puts communities at risk and fails to hold criminals accountable for their actions.
  • Targets law-abiding gun owners: While the bill reduces penalties for criminals, it fails to address the root causes of crime and unfairly targets law-abiding firearms owners, who already undergo thorough background checks and adhere to strict regulations.
  • Ignoring victim's rights: The bill's focus on reducing sentences for criminals neglects the rights and concerns of victims of violent crime, who deserve a justice system that prioritizes their safety and well-being.
  • Not addressing systemic racism: Despite claims that the bill addresses systemic racism, it lacks concrete measures to support Black, indigenous, and marginalized groups and is instead used to justify a soft-on-crime agenda.

NDP

  • Supports removing minimum sentences: The NDP supports the bill's initiative to remove mandatory minimum sentences for drug offenses, tobacco, and firearms provisions, arguing that these blunt tools remove judicial discretion and disproportionately incarcerate marginalized groups without reducing crime.
  • Decriminalization is needed: While supporting the bill, members emphasize that it falls short of addressing the core issue of treating drug addiction as a health issue rather than a criminal one. They advocate for decriminalization of drug use, a regulated safe supply, and a focus on prevention and treatment through the public health care system to effectively combat the opioid crisis.
  • Bill is insufficient: Members expressed disappointment that Bill C-5 is a "half measure" that does not adequately address either systemic racism in the justice system or the opioid crisis. They argue that it should include broader reforms, such as automatic expungement of criminal records for drug possession and restoring judicial discretion over sentencing.
  • A call for bolder action: Several members call for a more comprehensive approach, suggesting that the bill be sent to committee before the second reading vote to allow for amendments that would broaden its scope and include measures such as TRC call to action 32 and expungement provisions.

Bloc

  • Generally supports the bill: The Bloc Québécois generally supports the bill, believing in rehabilitation and crime reduction.
  • Problematic timing: Several members noted the timing of the bill's introduction as problematic, given rising gun violence in Montreal and other cities. They argue that tabling the bill without addressing the illegal importation of firearms sends the wrong message.
  • Favors separate debates: Some members suggest splitting the bill into two separate pieces of legislation to allow for a more focused debate on diversion and minimum penalties, as individuals may have differing views on each aspect.
  • Minimum sentences for repeat offenders: Members feel that while eliminating mandatory minimum sentences for first-time offenders may be beneficial for rehabilitation, maintaining them for repeat offenders is important for upholding the credibility of the justice system.

Green

  • Supports addressing systemic racism: The member appreciates the stated goal of addressing systemic racism in Canada's criminal justice system by targeting mandatory minimum penalties, given the overrepresentation of Indigenous and Black individuals in federal prisons.
  • Bill doesn't go far enough: The bill is criticized for being a half measure, as it only targets a small fraction of existing mandatory minimum penalties, failing to fully address systemic racism and align with the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's call to action 32.
  • Trust the judiciary: Removing mandatory minimum penalties would place trust in the judiciary, which is already required to impose sentences proportionate to the offense and consider individual circumstances, including the impact of colonialism and systemic racism.
  • Decriminalize illicit drugs: The bill misses the opportunity to decriminalize illicit drugs and treat drug use as a public health issue, which would align with expert advice and help prevent further deaths from a poisoned drug supply.
Was this summary helpful and accurate?

Criminal CodeGovernment Orders

December 14th, 2021 / 11:20 a.m.

Conservative

Pierre Paul-Hus Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question.

Based on what I hear from my colleagues, rural areas in Alberta and Saskatchewan are experiencing serious problems with people breaking into isolated homes while the owners are present. These people show up drunk, high and armed. These offences happen often and are a huge problem. This type of breaking and entering in rural areas is a problem that we are trying to stop.

However, by introducing a bill to reduce penalties, the government is sending the message that criminals can continue to commit crimes because even if they are caught, nothing will happen. That is the problem with Bill C‑5.

Criminal CodeGovernment Orders

December 14th, 2021 / 11:20 a.m.

Bloc

Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay Bloc Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech.

I also thank him for congratulating our colleague from Trois-Rivières. Winning by just one vote is still a win. We are very happy to have him here.

As far as I know, there are no studies showing that mandatory minimum penalties have any effect whatsoever on someone's decision to commit a crime. Since my colleague is claiming that mandatory minimums do have this effect, does he have some information that we do not? If so, could he share the sources with us?

Criminal CodeGovernment Orders

December 14th, 2021 / 11:20 a.m.

Conservative

Pierre Paul-Hus Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for his question. Obviously, I do not have the information with me. However, one thing is certain: Law and order follow a certain basic logic in our society.

Do we want a society where people know that, if they commit a crime, there are practically no consequences, or do we want a society that makes sure that people who decided to commit a crime, either once or repeatedly, will face suitable punishment?

Criminal CodeGovernment Orders

December 14th, 2021 / 11:25 a.m.

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Madam Speaker, the heart of this bill recognizes that our judges, who are independent and have the legal background and understanding of the circumstances surrounding a crime, are in a far greater position to deal with the circumstances for a sentence. Does the Conservative Party not have the confidence in our judicial system, that the dispositions of judges would be fair without having mandatory minimum sentences, which can cause other issues, such as systemic racism?

Criminal CodeGovernment Orders

December 14th, 2021 / 11:25 a.m.

Conservative

Pierre Paul-Hus Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC

Madam Speaker, every week, we hear from Canadians who do not understand why a certain judgment was handed down, why a person who committed a crime received a short sentence or a third of a sentence. We often hear questions about judgments.

The most important part of our job is creating laws. The administration of justice is the purview of judges. Of course, we need to provide the justice system and judges with the best tools possible.

However, when we start reducing sentences, when we remove criteria, judges will have to work with the tools Parliament has given them.

As legislators, we need to decide how much we want to reorient our justice system and Criminal Code so that judges can do their job based on the decisions made by the people's representatives.

Criminal CodeGovernment Orders

December 14th, 2021 / 11:25 a.m.

NDP

Gord Johns NDP Courtenay—Alberni, BC

Madam Speaker, we have heard from mayors, provincial governments, including British Columbia, health care professionals, frontline service workers, police chiefs and public health officials. They are calling for the decriminalization of the personal possession of drugs.

The opioid crisis is happening. Will my colleague listen to health professionals and police chiefs and not let politics stand in the way of saving lives?

Criminal CodeGovernment Orders

December 14th, 2021 / 11:25 a.m.

Conservative

Pierre Paul-Hus Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague. I actually did mention in my speech that I was not talking about drug users. Drug use is a problem that needs to be managed.

In this case, we are talking about criminals like drug dealers and drug traffickers. That is where we think we need to continue to focus and step up our efforts, not the opposite.

Criminal CodeGovernment Orders

December 14th, 2021 / 11:25 a.m.

Liberal

Emmanuella Lambropoulos Liberal Saint-Laurent, QC

Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Kings—Hants.

I would like to thank the Chair for giving me time to talk about Bill C-5, an act to amend the Criminal Code and the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act.

Canadians want a criminal justice system that makes them safer and reacts quickly and effectively to crime. They expect the criminal justice system to produce equitable outcomes for all.

Unfortunately, we know this is not the case for all Canadians. There are many reasons for this, including the way our criminal laws are drafted and how they are applied.

I am very proud to be part of a government that has demonstrated the courage to acknowledge that our criminal justice system and our laws do not always produce the most appropriate outcomes for everyone, and that has taken decisive action to correct this. In so doing, we are providing our courts and decision-makers within the criminal justice system with the flexibility they need to make better decisions for everyone.

Bill C-5 proposes needed law reform in three areas. First, it would give sentencing courts greater discretion to impose fit sentences by repealing mandatory minimum penalties of imprisonment for some offences in the Criminal Code and all offences in the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act. Second, it would provide sentencing courts with greater discretion to impose fit sentences by repealing unnecessary restrictions on the granting of conditional sentences of imprisonment. Third, it would require police and prosecutors to consider diverting simple possession cases away from the criminal justice system and to a health treatment program.

Traditional criminal justice system approaches to offences in simple drug possession cases are not working. This new approach would produce better outcomes for the accused and for society more generally.

At the heart of this bill is a recognition that those responsible for administering our criminal justice system need to have discretion in responding to crime. This is completely appropriate because the ability of our criminal justice system to produce appropriate outcomes is based on the proper exercise of discretion.

The Supreme Court of Canada has said on many occasions that the proper exercise of discretion is essential to the effective operation of our criminal justice system. I am in perfect agreement.

Bill C-5 would repeal all mandatory minimum penalties for six offences in the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act and for 14 offences in the Criminal Code. In so doing, it would restore judicial discretion to sentencing courts.

Some people may say that this means that the sentences for these offences will now be shorter and that, by doing away with these rigid sentencing rules, we are sending the message that these offences are not serious.

I would respond by saying that judges would impose appropriate penalties based on facts before them. A fit sentence is just that: one that is appropriate in all circumstances. If a particular trial judge's decision is inappropriate, our system enables this to be corrected through an appeal.

I also have complete confidence that the courts will continue to view these offences with the seriousness that is warranted. Repealing MMPs for certain offences involving firearms does not mean these offences are not serious or that courts will not recognize their level of severity. On the contrary, courts across Canada consistently comment on the fact that firearms-related crimes are particularly serious and should be addressed in correspondingly serious ways. That will not cease to be the case because of this bill, and offenders who deserve to go to jail will still go to jail.

What will be different, however, is the following. There would be fewer charter challenges, prosecutions would be faster and sentencing decisions would be better tailored to the circumstances of individual offenders. When courts are sentencing indigenous people, Black Canadians and members of marginalized communities, they will have the ability to meaningfully consider the circumstances of the offender before them to make a sentencing decision that properly takes circumstances into account. I urge all members to support these changes.

In our platform, our government committed to continuing to combat gender-based violence and fight gun smuggling with measures that we have previously introduced, such as lifetime background checks to prevent those with a history of abuse against their spouses or partners from obtaining firearms licences; red-flag laws that would allow immediate removal of firearms if people are threats to themselves or others, particularly to their spouses or partners; increased maximum penalties for firearms trafficking and smuggling from 10 to 14 years of imprisonment; and enhancing the capacity of the RCMP and the Canada Border Services Agency to combat the illegal importation of firearms.

Bill C-5 also proposes to restore judicial discretion for sentencing courts through amendments to the conditional sentence regime. Conditional sentences were created in 1996 to provide an innovative way for courts to sentence offenders by allowing them to serve their sentences in the community under strict punitive conditions, but also rehabilitative ones. These changes recognized that imprisonment at correctional facilities is not always necessary. These changes also responded to the fact that indigenous people were disproportionately being sent to prison and that this had to change.

The conditional sentencing regime has always disallowed the use of conditions sentences for offences punishable by a mandatory minimum penalty. Sentencing courts also have always had to be satisfied that serving a sentence in the community would not pose a public safety risk, and a sentence had to be less than two years. However, over time, additional restrictions placed on this tool have diminished its effectiveness and made it unavailable in a wider range of cases. This has taken away judicial discretion by removing an important tool for addressing over-incarceration.

With the changes proposed by Bill C-5, the government is correcting course from the previous Conservative government's limiting of CSOs so that courts can better respond to the specific facts before them. They will still only be available in cases where public safety would not be impacted. These are welcomed evidence-based changes that are broadly supported and that will make an important difference in our criminal justice system.

Lastly, I would like to briefly address the changes relating to simple drug possession.

The opioid crisis affecting many Canadian communities has focused the spotlight on the harms of drug addiction. It has forced communities to find innovative solutions, but it has also helped demonstrate that a response to addiction based on health measures and social action is far more effective than other means, namely criminal justice measures that stigmatize users and create barriers to their rehabilitation.

The government has long recognized the importance of making greater linkages between the justice system and other social systems, including health care. The proposed measures in this bill would do just that. This bill would encourage police and prosecutors to move away from charging and prosecuting for simple drug possession in appropriate cases and, instead, direct people into other appropriate systems that are better able to respond to the root causes that contribute to their interaction with the justice system in the first place.

If we think about it, instead of being charged and prosecuted, which can result in job loss, separation from family and community and increase the possibility of reoffending, the system would facilitate the supports needed, keep the offenders working and keep them in their communities. This is smart criminal justice policy that has been proven to work, and I strongly support these changes.

The reforms contained in the bill are long overdue and have garnered wide support. I know that many people would have preferred that the bill go even further, but I also know that the Minister of Justice said that this is only one major step in a broader effort to make our criminal justice system more equitable for all. It is essential that we take this step now.

I am asking all members to support this important legislative measure.

Criminal CodeGovernment Orders

December 14th, 2021 / 11:35 a.m.

Conservative

Greg McLean Conservative Calgary Centre, AB

Madam Speaker, I want to question my colleague on a few things, one of which is our absolute faith in judges, who are going to be wide open to give a bunch of good rules. The rules we set for our laws in Canada are very wide already, and judges have discretion, within a certain breadth, in how to deliver sentencing. The rules are not strict. However, judges do need a set of laws, rules and guidelines about how they apply sentencing. Regardless of the person in front of them at a point in time, there is a victim of crime as well, and all victims need to see there is crime and punishment and an outcome with a cost.

Would you suggest there is an objective here that you are not looking at, as far as the outcome goes, that will lead to something worse in society as opposed to something less bad in prisons?

Criminal CodeGovernment Orders

December 14th, 2021 / 11:35 a.m.

The Assistant Deputy Speaker Carol Hughes

I am not going to suggest it, so I would ask the hon. member to put his questions to the member through the Speaker.

The hon. member for Saint-Laurent.

Criminal CodeGovernment Orders

December 14th, 2021 / 11:35 a.m.

Liberal

Emmanuella Lambropoulos Liberal Saint-Laurent, QC

Madam Speaker, obviously this bill will be worked on at committee in order to really look at all the different ways it will have impacts on society. Currently, our justice system does not necessarily work. There is an overrepresentation of certain communities, and that is because judges do not necessarily have the discretion they should have. As I mentioned in my speech, people can still go through an appeal process if ever the judge's decision is deemed not to be the right one.

We do have faith in our judges, so we believe that this bill would only help improve the situation. Of course, when it comes to simple drug possession, nobody is really worse off except the person who has committed the crime, so a rehabilitation program is obviously a much better solution.

Criminal CodeGovernment Orders

December 14th, 2021 / 11:35 a.m.

Bloc

Julie Vignola Bloc Beauport—Limoilou, QC

Madam Speaker, actual research has shown that mandatory minimum penalties are not always useful. We all agree on that. We will talk about firearms later.

That being said, I want to return to the matter of prevention. There are reasons why young people turn to crime. We need to be able to respond to these young people and their families from an early age, namely by investing in health and social services and social housing structures. I am not talking about affordable housing; there is a world of difference between the two.

When will the government do something about prevention?

Criminal CodeGovernment Orders

December 14th, 2021 / 11:35 a.m.

Liberal

Emmanuella Lambropoulos Liberal Saint-Laurent, QC

Madam Speaker, I totally agree with the hon. member. I am a teacher, so I am well acquainted with the importance of prevention. I know how impressionable young people are and how important it is that they make the right choices.

I think this bill is taking us in the right direction by eliminating the minimum two-year sentence. That could help us get young people on the right track and send them to rehab instead of prison.

Criminal CodeGovernment Orders

December 14th, 2021 / 11:40 a.m.

NDP

Lori Idlout NDP Nunavut, NU

Uqaqtittiji, I thank the member for mentioning that the Liberal government acknowledges indigenous people are over-incarcerated and has trust in the judicial system. However, removing mandatory minimums instead of decriminalizing the personal possession of drugs makes sure that people with addictions will still end up in the criminal justice system rather than the health care system.

Why is the government only taking a half step toward reducing the overrepresentation of indigenous, Black and racialized Canadians in the criminal justice system?

Criminal CodeGovernment Orders

December 14th, 2021 / 11:40 a.m.

Liberal

Emmanuella Lambropoulos Liberal Saint-Laurent, QC

Madam Speaker, absolutely a lot more work needs to be done, and this is only a mall step in the right direction. It is, however, an important step in this direction. We want to make sure that we take all of the right steps without moving too quickly and endangering Canadians. For sure, there is a problem of overrepresentation of indigenous and racialized communities, and this is one of the reasons the bill is being presented.