An Act to amend the Corrections and Conditional Release Act (maximum security offenders)

Sponsor

Tony Baldinelli  Conservative

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

Status

Second reading (House), as of March 10, 2026

Subscribe to a feed (what's a feed?) of speeches and votes in the House related to Bill C-232.

Summary

This is from the published bill.

This enactment amends the Corrections and Conditional Release Act to require that inmates who have been found to be dangerous offenders or convicted of more than one first degree murder be assigned a security classification of maximum and confined in a maximum security penitentiary or area in a penitentiary.

Similar bills

C-342 (44th Parliament, 1st session) An Act to amend the Corrections and Conditional Release Act (maximum security offenders)

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-232s:

C-232 (2022) Arab Heritage Month Act
C-232 (2020) Climate Emergency Action Act
C-232 (2020) Climate Emergency Action Act
C-232 (2016) An Act to amend the Excise Act, 2001 (spirits)

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-232 proposes amending the Corrections and Conditional Release Act to mandate that dangerous offenders and those convicted of multiple first-degree murders remain classified as maximum-security inmates, thereby restricting their transfer to medium-security facilities and repealing the "least restrictive environment" standard.

Conservative

  • Mandating maximum-security confinement: The party proposes that all court-ordered dangerous offenders and mass murderers be permanently assigned to maximum-security prisons, preventing high-profile criminals from being transferred to medium-security facilities.
  • Repealing least restrictive standards: Conservatives seek to repeal the Liberal government's least restrictive environment standard for inmate placement, arguing it has eroded the justice system and allowed violent offenders to access more lenient living conditions.
  • Prioritizing victims' rights: The party argues the current system is imbalanced and overly empathetic toward offenders. They contend that transferring notorious criminals revictimizes families and undermines public confidence in federal institutions.
  • Criticizing medium-security conditions: Members express outrage that notorious offenders in medium security can access amenities like hockey rinks and tennis courts, while living in open-concept environments that are inappropriate for the gravity of their crimes.

Bloc

  • Commitment to rehabilitation: The Bloc opposes mandatory sentences that could hinder rehabilitation, emphasizing the importance of maintaining a justice system that evaluates inmates individually rather than applying broad, irrevocable security classifications.
  • Risk of wrongful convictions: Opposition is rooted in the fact that the bill could unfairly impact wrongfully convicted individuals, preventing the correction of judicial errors and potentially condemning innocent people to maximum-security conditions indefinitely.
  • Danger of single-case legislation: Members warn against drafting legislation motivated by a single high-profile offender, arguing that laws must be designed for broad, fair application across the entire correctional system rather than reacting to specific public outcries.
  • Supporting correctional officers: The party highlights the severe staff shortages and dangerous working conditions in federal penitentiaries, suggesting that the government should focus on supporting correctional officers and addressing security gaps like drone-smuggled contraband.

Liberal

  • Respect for judicial independence: The Liberals emphasize the importance of judicial independence and the professional authority of Correctional Service Canada to make independent, non-political determinations regarding inmate incarceration and security reclassifications.
  • Concerns over Conservative inconsistency: Lamoureux criticizes the Conservatives for reintroducing legislation that was previously rejected by most parties and points out their past failure to challenge similar offender reclassifications while they held government power.
  • Empathy for victims' families: The party recognizes the profound and lasting trauma experienced by families and communities affected by horrendous crimes, while arguing that such pain should not be used as a political tool for inconsistent policy.
Was this summary helpful and accurate?

Corrections and Conditional Release ActPrivate Members' Business

March 10th, 2026 / 5:30 p.m.

Conservative

Tony Baldinelli Conservative Niagara Falls—Niagara-on-the-Lake, ON

moved that Bill C-232, An Act to amend the Corrections and Conditional Release Act (maximum security offenders), be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise in this chamber to debate this important legislation that would help restore Canadians' trust and confidence in our criminal justice system and in federal institutions like Correctional Service Canada.

Bill C-232, an act to amend the Corrections and Conditional Release Act, is being debated today because I was inspired to bring this legislation forward after being approached by the loved ones of victims who were shocked and appalled to receive a phone call from CSC on May 29, 2023, about the transfer of serial killer and rapist Paul Bernardo from a maximum-security prison at Millhaven Institution in Ontario to a medium-security prison at La Macaza in Quebec.

This terrible decision by CSC Commissioner Anne Kelly not only shocked the country but appalled and revictimized the victims' families, friends and the communities I represent in Niagara Falls and Niagara-on-the-Lake. Bill C-232 is about doing what is right. It is about addressing and resolving a serious flaw in our criminal justice and corrections system that permits criminal monsters like Paul Bernardo, Dellen Millard, Mark Smich and Luka Magnotta, among others, to benefit and be allowed to transfer from a maximum-security institution to medium security.

This bill proposes to require that all court-ordered dangerous offenders and mass murderers be permanently assigned a maximum-security classification and confined in a maximum-security penitentiary or area in a penitentiary. It would also repeal the Liberals' least restrictive environment standard for assigning inmates to prison. This standard was adopted in 2018 under the Justin Trudeau government in Bill C-83.

In addition to repealing this weak policy, it would strengthen and restore the language of “only the necessary restrictions” that the previous Conservative government put in place when it passed the Safe Streets and Communities Act in 2012. In fact, that legislation, known as Bill C-10, was spearheaded by my predecessor, the Hon. Rob Nicholson, who proudly represented Niagara Falls for 24 years prior to his deserved retirement in 2019. Mr. Nicholson was the minister of justice and attorney general of Canada at the time.

Paul Bernardo is serving a life sentence as a dangerous offender for the horrific abduction, sexual assaults and murders of Kristen French and Leslie Mahaffy. Bernardo was convicted in 1995 and sentenced to life in prison with no possibility of parole for 25 years for stealing and ending the lives of two teenage girls who had their whole bright futures ahead of them. When he committed these atrocities, he also ruined the lives of their loved ones and sentenced them to a lifetime of inescapable pain, trauma and suffering.

So far, Bernardo has applied for parole three times, in 2018, 2021 and 2024. He has rightfully been denied each time. In his most recent parole hearing in November of 2024, Bernardo sought day parole at a halfway house or, at a minimum, escorted absences from prison so that he could attend a community program for sex offenders. He was denied both.

According to a CBC article, Tanya Nouwens, one of the members of a two-member parole panel, told Bernardo, “Although you have made progress, we are still placing a lot of weight on the clinical assessments, a lot of weight on the seriousness of your criminal behaviour. And for that reason, the board has determined today your risk would be undue”. While it was the right outcome, this quote is still concerning because it raises the question of progress.

I have to ask: Progress toward what end? Paul Bernardo is the worst of the worst. Let me be frank. He should never be granted parole, but after 10 years under the Liberal government's watch, Canada's justice and corrections system has been eroded and lost its balance. It has become far more one-sided and empathetic toward the offender and the consideration of the offender's care than the impacts on victims and victims' families and how law-abiding Canadians see, perceive and make sense of that system.

In fact, in a CBC article from June 2023, Benjamin Roebuck, the federal ombudsperson for victims of crime, said the corrections system strikes the wrong balance between victims' rights and prisoners' privacy rights. In a quote from that article, he says, “The entire system is imbalanced...the victims are the ones who are most directly affected, who continue to suffer from the consequences”.

Mr. Roebuck further reinforced this view when he testified at the public safety committee in November 2023, in a study on the rights of victims of crime, reclassification and transfer of federal offenders. Mr. Roebuck informed committee members that:

We need supporting legislation and comparable resources....

We know that victims are not put first, and I'm not sure that people understand the importance of information to victims of crime.

The fact that these terrible criminals are judged to be progressing through Canada's corrections system while the voices of victims of crime are somehow sidelined and, in a way, silenced is concerning and should be shocking to us all.

This is a non-partisan issue. It is about doing what is right. Keeping dangerous offenders, serial killers and mass murderers like Paul Bernardo, Dellen Millard, Mark Smich and Luka Magnotta in a maximum-security prison is common sense. Simply put, there should have been no way that any of these criminals were ever downgraded and transferred from a maximum-security prison to a medium-security prison, yet on May 29, 2023, this is exactly what happened to Paul Bernardo.

The CSC decision to transfer Bernardo to a medium-security prison was met with immediate and harsh public outrage on a national scale. Locally, both the cities of St. Catharines and Thorold passed municipal resolutions requesting that Correctional Service Canada and the Liberal government act. In the motion adopted by the City of St. Catharines, it states:

...City Council request[s] that the Government of Canada review and consider legislation changes to ensure transparency in the corrections and parole system and examine the guidelines around moving dangerous offenders and sadistic psychopaths who have not exhibited any remorse, empathy or insight into their crimes into medium security prisons....

The mayor of Thorold also wrote and expressed this:

The gravity of Mr. Bernardo's crimes, and the devastating impact they had on the lives of innocent individuals and their families, cannot be understated. Our community, along with the wider Niagara region, continues to bear the scars left by these reprehensible actions. It is of utmost importance that we prioritize public safety and ensure that those who pose a significant risk to society are appropriately confined and monitored.

I could not agree more. Decades since these heinous crimes were committed, the nightmares and scars from the terror still linger in the communities they impacted in St. Catharines, as well as in the Niagara communities that I represent in Niagara Falls and Niagara-on-the-Lake.

The Liberal government must answer these questions. Why are these prison transfers happening? Why are they benefiting Canada's most evil criminals and to what end? Is it the desire of the Liberal government to continue the progression of these dangerous offenders, serial killers and mass murderers until they are transferred to minimum-security prison or until they are granted parole or lesser conditions?

Surely the Liberal government does not believe that the likes of Paul Bernardo, Dellen Millard, Mark Smich and Luka Magnotta should continue to be downgraded until they are out of the corrections system, or does it?

The Canadian justice and corrections system must be rebalanced to support law-abiding Canadians and victims of crime. That needs to be the goal, and Bill C-232 will help restore this balance, as well as the confidence of Canadians in their federal institutions. These CSC decisions to transfer dangerous offenders and mass murderers from maximum-security prison to medium-security prison undermines public confidence, erodes public trust and raises serious questions and debate about who the justice system serves and prioritizes: the victims, as it should, or the criminal.

Canadians know something is wrong when even CSC Commissioner Anne Kelly, the person responsible for these transfers, conceded this about Bernardo. She said, “The fact that he is at a medium-security institution does not negate the fact that he is a psychopath, and that he committed horrific and unspeakable crimes”.

There is also the former public safety minister's own reaction to the news about Bernardo's transfer. He was quoted by CBC as saying, “as a former federal prosecutor and as a Canadian...I was profoundly concerned and again shocked by this decision”. This was a quote from the former minister who was in charge. It does not come as a surprise then that shortly after this national debacle, Minister Mendicino was dropped by Justin Trudeau from cabinet.

Canadians are in disbelief about this whole thing. These comments are from the people who hold authority. They are the ones Canadians expect to run and competently manage Canada's corrections system and institutions like CSC to ensure and uphold public safety. Despite their own acknowledgements of how bad Paul Bernardo is, they carried on and moved forward as if nothing had happened and continue to allow these types of transfers to occur.

The new Liberal Minister of Public Safety has failed to take any action, and the same CSC commissioner has failed to reverse her decisions. Last week, the government announced she is leaving her role and will be replaced. Canadians will be watching closely to see what actions the new commissioner takes, or fails to take, in their new role.

The person who first contacted me and asked that I get involved to help on this issue was a close friend of one of Paul Bernardo's victims. Her name is Marcia Penner. In a letter she wrote to CSC Commissioner Anne Kelly, and I think she speaks for all Canadians, she stated:

Please help me understand how someone such as Paul Bernardo can be housed in a facility such as this. One of Canada’s most notorious killers. A psychopathic serial rapist. A designated DANGEROUS OFFENDER. Does any of this mean anything? I can only imagine the prisoners remaining in maximum security penitentiaries must be asking the same question. If someone who commits the worst of the worst crimes doesn’t qualify for the harshest conditions, then who does?

Marcia is right, and Bill C-232 is the solution to fix this major problem and do what is ultimately right. Bill C-232 also complements a larger Conservative effort, through several private members' bills, to combat the out-of-control crime wave Canadians are facing after a decade of bad Liberal policies that weakened our federal institutions like the CSC.

The Liberal government now talks about implementing needed justice reforms. Sadly, these reforms are required to fix the problems the Liberals created when they weakened provisions of previous Conservative legislation through bills such as Bill C-5, Bill C-75 and Bill C-83. There is hope. Two of my colleagues' bills, Bill C-243 and Bill C-242, resume their second reading debates soon. I am encouraged to see that both Bill C-225 and Bill C-221 have passed second reading and have been referred to committee for further study and consideration by parliamentarians. I am hopeful that Bill C-232 will follow suit and receive the widespread support of my hon. colleagues to reach committee as well.

Enough is enough. It is time we start rebalancing the corrections system to weigh victims' considerations more strongly, restore Canadians' trust and confidence in our federal institutions and return dangerous offenders and mass murderers like Paul Bernardo, Dellen Millard, Mark Smich and Luka Magnotta to maximum-security prisons where they rightly belong. With the support of colleagues in the House, we can make this happen. We can respond to the calls from our constituents, communities and, more importantly, the families of those victims of crime.

I stand in my place today because I made a promise to see what I could do to help correct a horribly wrong decision made by the government. I ask my colleagues to support this effort. Working together, we can accomplish great things and do so in memory of those so tragically lost.

Corrections and Conditional Release ActPrivate Members' Business

March 10th, 2026 / 5:45 p.m.

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

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

Mr. Speaker, it was not that long ago that we had a Conservative member bring forward Bill C-351, which is, in essence, the same as Bill C-232. At that time, there was a debate and ultimately a vote. We saw members of the Liberal Party, the Bloc Party, the New Democratic Party and, I believe, even the member from the Green Party vote against the legislation.

Can the member give a clear indication as to what the actual difference is between the two pieces of legislation? Has he received support from any of those political entities with respect to this current version?

Corrections and Conditional Release ActPrivate Members' Business

March 10th, 2026 / 5:45 p.m.

Conservative

Tony Baldinelli Conservative Niagara Falls—Niagara-on-the-Lake, ON

Mr. Speaker, I stand in this place because I am responding to the concerns that were expressed to me by the families and friends of the victims in my community. They asked that we take steps to fix the flawed legislation from Bill C-83; to make the changes found in my legislation, Bill C-232; and to restore wording of the previous legislation, which the government removed and added the wording “least restrictive environment” when it comes to prison selection.

We are going to go back to the previous wording that worked in the Conservative legislation: “only the necessary restrictions”. That change needs to be made. We also need to designate dangerous offenders and murderers who murder multiple people as receiving a maximum-security classification and designation.

Corrections and Conditional Release ActPrivate Members' Business

March 10th, 2026 / 5:45 p.m.

Bloc

Claude DeBellefeuille Bloc Beauharnois—Salaberry—Soulanges—Huntingdon, QC

Mr. Speaker, I understand my colleague who is affected and who is using his privilege to introduce a bill that affects him and his constituents. However, when a member introduces a bill, it cannot be tailored to one specific case. It has to be designed with society as a whole in mind, and it must apply to a broad group.

Unless I missed something, I did not hear my colleague mention the possibility of miscarriages of justice, for example. We know that mistakes are made. We know that there are people who have been convicted of murder and who have served their sentences only to later be acquitted. This happened to one inmate in Quebec after 18 years.

Is my colleague's bill too restrictive? Would applying it to all cases, in a more broad and general way, cause problems for the justice system?

Corrections and Conditional Release ActPrivate Members' Business

March 10th, 2026 / 5:45 p.m.

Conservative

Tony Baldinelli Conservative Niagara Falls—Niagara-on-the-Lake, ON

Mr. Speaker, there are two provisions. The bill is about changing the wording with regard to “least restrictive environment” and going back to the previous Conservative wording. It also would designate people who are dangerous offenders and those who commit multiple murders as having a maximum-security classification so they serve their time in maximum security rather than medium security. It is about designating the worst of the worst, the people who have committed the most heinous of crimes, and ensuring that they serve their sentence in a maximum-security institution, where they belong.

Corrections and Conditional Release ActPrivate Members' Business

March 10th, 2026 / 5:45 p.m.

Conservative

Frank Caputo Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Nicola, BC

Mr. Speaker, it is always a pleasure to rise on behalf of the people of Kamloops—Thompson—Nicola on an issue about which I am very passionate. One of the reasons is that I actually worked in the federal correctional system, which is completely germane to the bill.

I want to respond to something the member for Winnipeg North said. In all candour, I have not heard a single Liberal speak today apart from the member, and I have been in the House throughout the day. There are other Liberals here, six or seven of them in the House right now, yet we cannot—

Corrections and Conditional Release ActPrivate Members' Business

March 10th, 2026 / 5:45 p.m.

The Assistant Deputy Speaker John Nater

The member knows he cannot note the absence or presence of members in the House. I am going to ask him to very quickly get to the point of his question so I can give the member time to respond.

Corrections and Conditional Release ActPrivate Members' Business

March 10th, 2026 / 5:45 p.m.

Conservative

Frank Caputo Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Nicola, BC

Mr. Speaker, with respect, I did not say who was or was not here.

At the end of the day, here is the problem: The member is talking about who on the Liberal side did not vote for this. As Conservatives, we take our instructions from the people who sent us here. The Liberals can say all they want about not supporting this and that it is never going to pass. Why should we be taking our instructions from the member for Winnipeg North and not the people of Canada—

Corrections and Conditional Release ActPrivate Members' Business

March 10th, 2026 / 5:50 p.m.

The Assistant Deputy Speaker John Nater

The hon. member for Niagara Falls—Niagara-on-the-Lake has time for a brief response.

Corrections and Conditional Release ActPrivate Members' Business

March 10th, 2026 / 5:50 p.m.

Conservative

Tony Baldinelli Conservative Niagara Falls—Niagara-on-the-Lake, ON

Mr. Speaker, I said this earlier in my remarks: I stand in my place today putting forward this legislation because I made a promise to my constituents to listen and respond to their concerns and to take action to ensure that monsters like Paul Bernardo serve their sentence in a maximum-security institution, where they rightly belong.

Corrections and Conditional Release ActPrivate Members' Business

March 10th, 2026 / 5:50 p.m.

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

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

Mr. Speaker, I know that the member opposite is very pleased I have taken the opportunity to rise to address this piece of legislation, even though with his presence in the chamber one has to question his level of alertness. If he were actually following the debate today, he would know that numerous Liberal members of Parliament stood up not only to address the issues of the day but also to ask questions.

Corrections and Conditional Release ActPrivate Members' Business

March 10th, 2026 / 5:50 p.m.

An. hon. member

Oh, oh!

Corrections and Conditional Release ActPrivate Members' Business

March 10th, 2026 / 5:50 p.m.

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Mr Speaker, if the member maybe just paid a bit more attention, for example, right now as he is heckling across the way, he would probably have a better understanding of what actually is taking place inside the House.

Let me make a suggestion. I believe the member was making reference to taking instructions from the people who sent us here. We will find that this is in fact something all members, I would like to think, do, whether they are a Liberal, a Conservative, a New Democrat, or whatever political entity one might be from.

Corrections and Conditional Release ActPrivate Members' Business

March 10th, 2026 / 5:50 p.m.

An hon. member

Oh, oh!

Corrections and Conditional Release ActPrivate Members' Business

March 10th, 2026 / 5:50 p.m.

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Mr. Speaker, I can assure the member who continues to want to heckle me that the people I represent in Winnipeg North understand how important it is to respect the issue of judicial independence. Judicial independence is a shared responsibility between different levels of government, and I would suggest that even when we deal with incarceration and with Correctional Service Canada, which makes the determinations, I believe Canadians fully understand and respect that.

I see that the member is having a very difficult time appreciating what I am saying. I will get a bit more into it for the member opposite, so he should stay tuned and be alert, and he might actually learn something here.

Let me first express what is a very difficult thing to do: to recognize the pain that has been experienced by family and friends of victims, who have had to go through trials of all different forms as a direct result of a horrendous crime that has been committed. One can only imagine how a parent of a child who has been raped, molested and then murdered is affected. We could factor in a serial killer. It affects not only the family; it also affects the community, and I would suggest it affects the country.

People can understand just how horrendous it is. Sadly, in society, whether it is Canada or virtually any other nation, these crime take place. I for one cannot believe, or I find it very hard to understand, unless one has lived that experience first-hand, just how difficult it is, especially for a parent. I do not think one can ever recover from an incident of losing a child, whatever the age of that child might be, because of the type of horrendous crimes we are talking about.

It was a number of years ago that the Conservatives raised during question period the whole McClintic ordeal, another horrific incident that had taken place in Canada. It actually dealt with the same type of issue. All we need to do is check Hansard, and we will read about Conservative after Conservative standing in his or her place, talking about it in a very graphic way, in great detail. I tended to disagree with that, and I would hope that if someone does the research and looks back, they would find that I was consistent with my comments.

It continued day after day until Ralph Goodale took the floor and pointed out a very important observation. I would like to quote Ralph Goodale in a speech that he gave here in the House. This is important because it goes back to 2014. The government of the day was under Stephen Harper, with whom the current leader of the Conservative Party sat around the cabinet table. Ralph Goodale stood up on October 2, 2018, and said:

Mr. Speaker, Tori Stafford's brutal death in 2009 was a horrible, gut-wrenching crime for her family, but for the whole country too.

The killer, McClintic, was reclassified as medium security in 2014. The government of that day did not challenge that decision. In fact, McClintic remains in a medium-security correctional facility today.

I want people to realize that a member of the Conservative Party, and the Conservative Party itself, attempted to bring forward the legislation, in essence, previously. It was voted against by all political entities except for the Conservative Party, which included the Bloc, the New Democrats, the Greens and the Liberals. The Conservatives are reintroducing, in essence, the same legislation.

I point out what Ralph Goodale said, because back then, when today's leader of the Conservative Party had an opportunity and he sat around the cabinet table, why did the Conservatives not contest the decision in that situation? I think it is a valid question to be asking.

At the end of the day, Hansard is there. The Conservatives can read it. I do not think we do a service to the chamber by continuing to build up some sort of an expectation that if they were in government, they would implement the legislation, when the leader of the Conservative Party sat around the cabinet table and did not do so. If we take a look at the decision, we see that Correctional Service Canada makes the decisions to transfer and reclassify, as it did in 2014, when the leader of the Conservative Party said nothing. As a result—