Bill C-9

Combatting Hate Act

An Act to amend the Criminal Code (hate propaganda, hate crime and access to religious or cultural places)

Sponsor

Sean Fraser Liberal

Status

In committee (House), as of Oct. 1, 2025

Subscribe to a feed (what's a feed?) of speeches and votes in the House related to Bill C-9.

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 to, among other things,
(a) repeal the requirement that the Attorney General consent to the institution of proceedings for hate propaganda offences;
(b) create an offence of wilfully promoting hatred against any identifiable group by displaying certain symbols in a public place;
(c) create a hate crime offence of committing an offence under that Act or any other Act of Parliament that is motivated by hatred based on certain factors;
(d) create an offence of intimidating a person in order to impede them from accessing certain places that are primarily used for religious worship or by an identifiable group for certain purposes; and
(e) create an offence of intentionally obstructing or interfering with a person’s lawful access to such places.

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-9s:

C-9 (2021) Law An Act to amend the Judges Act

C-9 (2020) Law An Act to amend the Income Tax Act (Canada Emergency Rent Subsidy and Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy)

C-9 (2020) An Act to amend the Chemical Weapons Convention Implementation Act

C-9 (2016) Law Appropriation Act No. 1, 2016-17

Debate Summary

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-9 amends the Criminal Code to combat hate by creating new offences for intimidation, obstruction, hate-motivated crimes, and the public display of hate symbols, while codifying the definition of hatred.

Liberal

Supports combatting hate bill: The Liberal party strongly supports Bill C-9 to combat rising hate crimes, protect vulnerable communities, and ensure all Canadians can live freely with dignity and safety, as police-reported hate crimes have more than doubled.
Establishes new criminal offenses: The bill creates new offenses for intimidating or obstructing access to religious/cultural places, schools, and community centers, and a new hate crime offense for any federal crime motivated by hatred.
Targets hate symbols and streamlines justice: It criminalizes the public display of specific hate or terrorist symbols to promote hatred (with legitimate use exemptions), codifies the definition of "hatred," and removes the Attorney General's consent for hate propaganda charges to expedite enforcement.

Conservative

Opposes Bill C-9 as flawed and redundant: The Conservative Party supports the goal of protecting Canadians from hate but views Bill C-9 as a flawed, late, and redundant political gesture, arguing that existing laws are sufficient if properly enforced.
Concerns about free speech and lowered hate threshold: The bill risks criminalizing legitimate dissent by removing the word "extreme" from the Supreme Court's definition of "hatred," thereby lowering the legal threshold for hate speech and expanding state power.
Rejects removal of attorney general consent: Conservatives oppose the removal of the Attorney General's consent requirement for hate propaganda charges, viewing it as a critical safeguard against politicization, misuse, and vexatious private prosecutions.
Criticizes selective focus and lack of enforcement: The party criticizes the bill for not explicitly addressing rising anti-Christian hate crimes and for potentially mischaracterizing sacred symbols, while failing to prioritize enforcement of existing laws against violent crime.

NDP

Opposes bill in current form: The NDP cannot support the bill as it stands, arguing it risks criminalizing peaceful protest and legitimate dissent due to vague language and broad definitions.
Fails to target white nationalism: The bill disappointingly fails to address the violent activities of the growing white nationalist movement, leaving vulnerable communities without necessary tools.
Redundant and excessive sentences: Existing laws already address hate as an aggravating factor. The bill introduces excessive and disproportionate maximum sentences, up to life imprisonment.
Concerns about police discretion: Vague language grants too much discretionary power to law enforcement, risking subjectivity and potential weaponization against groups, along with political misuse of terror lists.

Bloc

Calls to remove religious text exception: The Bloc Québécois demands the removal of the Criminal Code exception that allows promoting hatred or antisemitism if based on a religious text, deeming it absurd.
Criticizes definition of hatred: The party finds the bill's definition of "hatred" to be complex and difficult to apply, predicting future Supreme Court challenges and suggesting committee work is needed.
Questions new access restrictions: The Bloc opposes creating new offenses for restricting access to places of worship, suggesting existing Criminal Code provisions and other laws are sufficient.
Connects hate to failed integration: The party attributes the rise in hate to the Liberal government's immigration policy, which failed to provide adequate integration support, leading to a clash of values.

Was this summary helpful and accurate?

Combatting Hate ActGovernment Orders

October 1st, 2025 / 6:35 p.m.

Conservative

Matt Strauss Conservative Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON

Mr. Speaker, I agree with the member. I thank him for the point.

Hate cannot be tolerated, no matter what justification is given by the former prime minister's former principal secretary. I hope that we all keep that in mind as we approach commentary around the present legislation.

I myself was distressed when the Conservative justice shadow critic brought up this problem of church burnings and was met with laughter from the other side. I did think that this was inappropriate, so I thank the member for raising the point.

Combatting Hate ActGovernment Orders

October 1st, 2025 / 6:35 p.m.

Bloc

Patrick Bonin Bloc Repentigny, QC

Mr. Speaker, I have a relatively simple question and I would like a relatively simple answer. There is currently an exemption in the Criminal Code known as the religious exemption.

Does my colleague agree with that exemption?

Combatting Hate ActGovernment Orders

October 1st, 2025 / 6:35 p.m.

Conservative

Matt Strauss Conservative Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON

Mr. Speaker, I fear it is not a simple question. It goes to the heart of what I was talking about in the John Stuart Mill quote and philosophical liberalism. What one person means when they say something from a different culture or a different religion can be taken differently. That is why we have to have a bias toward philosophical liberalism that I fear the government is abandoning with the present legislation.

Combatting Hate ActGovernment Orders

October 1st, 2025 / 6:35 p.m.

The Assistant Deputy Speaker John Nater

Is the House ready for the question?

Combatting Hate ActGovernment Orders

October 1st, 2025 / 6:35 p.m.

Some hon. members

Question.

Combatting Hate ActGovernment Orders

October 1st, 2025 / 6:35 p.m.

The Assistant Deputy Speaker John Nater

The question is on the motion.

If a member participating in person wishes that the motion be carried or carried on division, or if a member of a recognized party participating in person wishes to request a recorded division, I would invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.

Combatting Hate ActGovernment Orders

October 1st, 2025 / 6:35 p.m.

Liberal