Human Resources Committee on April 16th, 2026

[Annie Koutrakis, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

Amendment G-11 would introduce a new clause adding a coming into force provision.

I move that Bill C-222 be amended by adding after line 31 on page 2 the following:

Coming into Force

8 This Act, other than section 3.3, comes into force on the first Sunday after the day that is six months after the day on which this Act receives royal assent or on an earlier day to be fixed by order of the Governor in Council.

The rationale for this is that a coming into force six months following royal assent ensures that the benefit can be implemented on time for parents who wish to access it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

You've heard amendment G-11. Shall it carry?

Do you have a question, Mr. Richards?

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Airdrie—Cochrane, AB]

It's more of a comment.

When I see an extra six months being asked for that these families and these parents would have to wait.... They've waited a decade already These changes could have been made a decade ago. Now they're being asked to wait another six months. We don't want to hold this bill up from passing, but I can tell you I have serious concerns about parents being asked to wait another six months.

I can't support this. We won't hold the bill up. We'll abstain in order to see the bill get through committee, but I cannot support this idea of six months.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Go ahead, Ms. Koutrakis.

[Annie Koutrakis, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

I think this would be a good opportunity to ask the officials here today why it cannot be done immediately after royal assent. It would help the committee members understand the rationale.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Go ahead, Mr. Cadieux.

[Benoit Cadieux]

I am happy to do that. Thank you.

Why is it six months? The first reason is that, as you may know, new parents in Quebec are covered under the Quebec parental insurance plan, so we need some time to negotiate and have discussions with Quebec. They may need time to make potential adjustments on their end in order to make sure there's alignment between their plan and what's proposed in this bill.

The second reason is that some employers offer supplementary unemployment benefit plans that top up EI benefits. They need time to be notified and to make potential adjustments to their plans in order to account for the extra time being provided under this bill.

Finally, the third reason is that we need time to update guidance materials and communications materials. Deanne can talk more about that, if needed.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Do you have your hand up, Ms. Falk?

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster—Meadow Lake, SK]

I think Ms. Goodridge had hers up before mine, though.

Go ahead, Laila.

[Laila Goodridge, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Cold Lake, AB]

Thank you.

The other piece of this amendment that scares me is that it will receive royal assent after.... There are bills that pass and linger for years without receiving royal assent. That is not necessarily uncommon in the world of private members' bills.

I am wondering if there is any kind of assurance we can have. I know that no one sitting around this table controls whether a bill receives royal assent or not, but we need to urge the government to use every tool possible to get this bill's royal assent as fast as humanly possible and make sure that those six months.... There is a space in there where it could be faster. I would urge every person sitting here, and everyone working on this project, to start doing the work right now so that it can be done as fast as humanly possible. Frankly, there are families relying on this. They've been waiting for a decade and want to see this cross the finish line.

Like my colleague said, we're not happy about this extra delay, but we want to make sure there are no further delays. This is some strongly worded mom guilt for everybody listening to make sure this actually happens. Don't hold up the royal assent, because that would be really silly—I'm not allowed to use the other S-word.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

That, Ms. Goodridge, was well said.

I'm going to let Mr. Beech respond. Then I have Ms. Falk and Madame Larouche.

[Terry Beech, Liberal, Burnaby North—Seymour, BC]

I super appreciate all levels of mom guilt, and I want to assure you that this is a feature and not a bug. There were discussions about this potentially taking longer, and I want to constrain that to a maximum of six months. I hope it can be completed much faster than that.

I would also like to assure you that I've already approached a sponsor in the Senate. They were previously a pediatrician and are very invested in this. We've gone to all the different parties. I'm hoping we can get this through very quickly.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you.

I'll go to Ms. Falk and then Madame Larouche.

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster—Meadow Lake, SK]

Thank you, Chair.

On this conversation about a bill's coming into force, I will note that I had a PMB for adoption leave. It was for adoptive parents to be able to receive the same type of leave as those who don't adopt children but rather have children naturally, including surrogate parents. The government at the time, the Liberals, voted against it. They then stole that bill and put it in their 2023 fall economic statement. We're now in 2026, and it still has not been enacted.

I'm glad to see that there's something in here. I don't think it's enough. It's shameful that the Liberal government stole that bill and has not enacted it. We still have adoptive parents and intended parents at a disadvantage. It's not equitable for those who have children via surrogacy or adoption.

I appreciate, MP Beech, that you've taken it upon yourself to ensure that it's there. Any other advocating you can do with the department officials beside you.... I would urge them to ensure that adoptive parents and parents through surrogacy can have the same access to leave as other parents.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Ms. Falk.

Madame Larouche, you want the floor.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

I'll be quick. I know we're short on time and we want to make sure we adopt the bill.

I just want to reiterate that the Conservative members and I were extremely frustrated when we found out, at the beginning of the week, that an hour of meeting time had been cancelled without our being consulted. It worried us. We so want to see this bill passed that, for us, any delay is a worrying indication of the government's genuine desire to move the bill forward.

Yes, we are getting to the end of something today, but I do want to say that, like the Conservatives, the Bloc is going to do everything it can to remind the government that we are the ones calling for a comprehensive EI reform. That includes increasing the number of benefit weeks to 50. We are committed to bringing forward another bill on that, as we wait for any legislation that brings a bit of humanity into this world, like this bill. The passage of this bill can't wait any longer. Like the Conservatives, the Bloc will be there to underscore that the bill needs to be passed quickly, that it needs to be given royal assent, and that it must not come into force any more than six months later.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Ms. Larouche.

Shall G-11 carry?

(Amendment agreed to on division)

Shall the short title carry?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Shall the title carry?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Shall the bill as amended carry?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Shall the chair report the bill as amended to the House?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Shall the committee order a reprint of the bill as amended for the use of the House at report stage?