Bill C-257

An Act to amend the Criminal Code (promotion of terrorist activity or group)

This enactment amends the Criminal Code to create an offence of wilfully promoting a terrorist activity or a terrorist group, or any activity of a terrorist group.

Government Business No. 6—Proceedings on Bill C-9

[Roman Baber, Conservative, York Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, the “guillotine” or the “hammer” is generally how these motions are referred to when the government shuts down debate. It is shutting down speech, ironically, on a bill that deals with speech and the issue of free speech. The Liberals are saying there has been enough debate on Bill C-9. Yes, there has been a lot of talk between politicians on it, but the Liberals are refusing to hear from witnesses and from Canadians.

I want to tell Canadians not just about Bill C-9, but about what the Liberals did to shove this terrible piece of legislation down our throats to the point that today they have to drop a nuclear bomb to stop me from doing my job at the justice committee.

We have heard from a handful of witnesses on one of the most consequential pieces of legislation this Parliament will take up. We were supposed to hear from B’nai Brith and Simon Wiesenthal. They were scheduled to testify, but the former head of the committee suspended witness hearings before they were able to testify and ordered the committee to proceed to clause-by-clause consideration. I had witnesses calling me personally. Canadian Women Against Antisemitism called me. I had Imam Tawhidi call me to ask why he was not permitted to testify on this piece of legislation. The former committee chair, the same committee chair who asked how certain scriptures could not be hate speech, is the same committee chair who refused to hear from multiple witnesses who wanted to make submissions on this piece of legislation even before the amendments.

We proceeded to the clause-by-clause consideration of Bill C-9. I was there and had a front row seat for all of it. We were working in good faith. I worked with my Liberal colleague from Mount Royal. We agreed to fix the definition of “hate speech”. My concern with respect to the removal of the consent of the Attorney General was also dealt with. Even better, I was surprised to see in the proposed amendments that my private member's bill, Bill C-257, against the wilful promotion of terrorism, in one form or another, made it into the proposed amendments by the Liberals. That was one of the best days of my career.

We could have potentially fixed this bill. Then I learned about the Bloc's amendment from the news media. The Liberals did not have the courage to tell us what they were doing. They had agreed to the Bloc's amendment to remove the religious defence to hate speech from the Criminal Code. The entire exercise had been a fiasco.

However, the amendment that the Bloc passed with its Liberal friends is predicated on false pretenses. By moving this amendment, the Bloc is saying that people should not be able to hide behind a religious exemption to hate speech. As we know, it is because an imam in Montreal named Charkaoui called for the extermination of the enemies of Gaza. The Bloc is saying that because he was not prosecuted, we need to remove this religious exemption. That is just not true. To avail oneself of the religious exemption, the words one utters need to be in good faith. When one calls for the extermination of people, that is not in good faith. If we look at the law, the religious defence does not apply to incitement. It applies to the second category of hate speech, which is the wilful promotion of hatred. One cannot hide behind the religious defence when one is inciting violence as incitement is not protected.

I read a statement at committee from the Quebec prosecutors that said that they did not lay charges against Charkaoui not because of the religious defence, but because the “enemies of Gaza” was not an identifiable group of people. Apparently, one can call for their extermination, according to the Quebec prosecution, but this had nothing to do with the amendment or the religious defence. The Bloc knows this. The Liberals know this. This is a charade.

I will be splitting my time.

Instruction to Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights

[Roman Baber, Conservative, York Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I do not mind their heckles. I welcome their heckles.

The Liberals did not have the courage to show up at the justice committee today. They cancelled the committee that was to consider the bill clause by clause. They are afraid because they know the bill is going nowhere and that it is a terrible bill. Therefore, we should be travelling across the country, from coast to coast to coast, so that Canadians can learn what a terrible piece of legislation this is.

Almost every witness we heard from at the justice committee said that the Liberals missed the point and that what they should have done is criminalize the wilful promotion of terrorism. That is what we are seeing on Canada's streets. During the previous Conservative government, we had a law that criminalized the glorification of terrorism, but Justin Trudeau and his minions, in 2017, repealed Bill C-51. Instead, what we have going on right now is folks in my riding dressing like Yahya Sinwar, the worst murderer of Jews since the Holocaust, who is being glorified and celebrated.

This is why I am proud that just a few weeks ago, I brought my first private member's bill to criminalize the wilful promotion of terrorism, terrorist activity, terrorist groups or any activity of a terrorist group, and I challenge the Liberals. If they actually want to do something about this, if they want to do something about what is happening on Canada's streets, what is happening in my riding, which is one of the most Jewish ridings in the country, they should pass my PMB, Bill C-257, and criminalize the wilful promotion of terrorism, terrorist activity or terrorist groups.

I would like to take a pause for a minute and speak a bit from the heart. I am joined here by my friend from Saskatchewan. I had a couple of friends over for refreshments at my home last week. My friend asked me if I could talk to him about what it was like in the U.S.S.R. I was born and lived in the Soviet Union until I was almost nine. If I could capture it in one word, it would be fear. As an eight-year-old, one has enough intellectual presence to understand when one's family is afraid.

I first realized that I was of the Jewish faith when I was four or five. It was on the eve of Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish new year. I walked into my grandparents' bedroom, as I was raised by my grandparents, and I saw my grandpa reading a Siddur, a Jewish prayer book. This would have been in 1984 or 1985. Even then, despite Gorbachev's glasnost and, arguably, perestroika, if a Soviet resident was found with a Jewish prayer book, they could potentially be looking at a labour camp for three to five years. That was one of my first memories. I have asked my dad about it subsequently. He said it was unbelievable that my grandpa had that book.

I cannot believe that I am sitting in the House right now after hearing the member, who is the Canadian identity and culture minister, essentially suggest that reciting parts of the Bible could somehow be criminalized, almost like a strict liability offence. I cannot fathom that. It is as if we were back in the U.S.S.R., just like the Beatles song.

One of the worst things this bill would do, in addition to now supposedly looking to eliminate the religious defence, is that it would lower the threshold for what is hate speech.

I had a considerable discussion with my friend about it the other week, about how we were taught that we should avoid certain topics. Certain topics were taboo. We were not allowed to discuss the west. We were not allowed to use the word “America”. We were not allowed to use the word “Israel”. We were not allowed to point out that there is no bread, jeans or eggs in the store. That was because the only religion allowed was Communism.

When my friend from Bowmanville—Oshawa North talks about Liberal colonialism, that is exactly what it is. It is Liberal dictatorship of our freedom of thought. There are no other thoughts allowed, other than Liberal thought. Someone should be ashamed. I am proud of my Conservative colleagues. There should be shame no more.

We know that we are on the right side of this one and so do the Liberals. That is why, this morning, contrary to the suggestion that they wanted to move this bill forward, they cancelled today's justice committee meeting. I was prepared to show up tonight. We were all prepared to show up at 3:30 to discuss, clause by clause, this bill, but they locked us out.

Why are the Liberals saying they are bringing this religious exemption? This is very important. Supposedly, according to the Bloc, it was because of a guy named Adil Charkaoui, who, on October 28, 2024, in an Arabic speech to protesters in Montreal, denounced Zionist aggressors and called on Allah to kill the enemies of the people of Gaza, to spare none of them. The Bloc is suggesting that it is because of a religious exemption that Adil Charkaoui was not charged. That is not true at all.

First of all, we are talking about incitement to violence. If members read paragraph 319(3)(b), it only applies to the government. As to the second section, which is the wilful promotion of hatred in 319, it does not apply to 319(1), so I reject that argument just on legal grounds, to begin with.

Second of all, the section is very clear. In order for a person to avail themself of the defence, the religious speech has to be in good faith. That means that a person cannot wish for the extermination of peoples. If they are wishing for the extermination of peoples, it is no longer in good faith and the defence does not apply.

Finally, as if we do not read the news, the Quebec prosecutorial service came out on this in May of 2025 and explained what transpired. The reason they did not proceed against Charkaoui is not because of a religious defence, but because they said that he did not call for violence against an identifiable group of people. The enemies of Allah, according to the Quebec prosecutors, was not a defined group they could latch onto the incitement to violence provision and charge.

This is a farce. I do not know why we are here. We could be debating bail right now. We have Bill C-14, a very weak attempt to reform bail and sentencing that is presently before the justice committee. Last Tuesday, the Liberals locked us out, and they accuse us of a filibuster. Tonight, the Liberals locked us out, and they accuse us of somehow sabotaging this.

Let us get together tonight. Let us reopen the committee and hear about bail. Let us get some work done. Toronto is turning into Gotham City, yet these Liberals have no shame. Now reality has caught up to them.

Canadians across the country understand that this is a terrible bill. I implore the government to withdraw it. Let us go back to the drawing board. Do not do me any favours. I represent one of the largest Jewish constituencies in the country. This bill does nothing to protect them.