Justice Committee on Nov. 6th, 2025

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Miller]

Yes, that’s correct.

We will read it in French.

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

Whether it’s read in French or in English doesn’t bother me. I just want to be sure that we are voting on the amendment proposed by Ms. Lattanzio.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Miller]

We are voting on the final amended motion.

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

In the initial motion we received, it was stated that the committee would call on the government to invoke the notwithstanding clause. However, according to Ms. Lattanzio’s amendment, the committee would instead call on the government to “table legislation to address child sexual exploitation” and so on.

It is on this that we are voting, and not on what has just been read.

Is that right?

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Miller]

Yes, that’s right.

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

The proposed amendment will be included, otherwise—

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Miller]

Let’s read the amended motion in full. That is what we will vote on.

While we’re at it, I would ask you to read it in French, Mr. Clerk.

[The Clerk]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Here is the motion as amended:

That, given that the Supreme Court of Canada removed mandatory minimum sentences for offences related to child sexual exploitation, and incorrectly ruled that these mandatory minimum sentences were cruel and unusual; and given that the premiers of Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Ontario, as well as the Leader of the Official Opposition in Manitoba, have all publicly called for the use of the notwithstanding clause to overturn this decision; the committee call on the government to table legislation to address child sexual exploitation reaffirming Parliament’s unwavering commitment to protecting children and ensuring that offenders face the toughest sentences that our justice system allows, provided that the government table its legislative response to this Supreme Court of Canada ruling before the end of 2025, and that this motion be reported to the House.

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

I’m fine with that.

Mr. Chair, I would like to propose an amendment to this motion.

Should I do it now or once we have adopted it?

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Miller]

It would need to be done now.

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

Okay.

I therefore propose to strike the word “incorrectly” in the first paragraph, so it reads as follows: “…mandatory minimum sentences for offences related to child sexual exploitation, and ruled that these mandatory minimum sentences were cruel and unusual”.

I do not think our committee should tell the Supreme Court judges that they made an incorrect ruling. That seems a bit awkward to me. I would remove the word “incorrectly”. It doesn’t change the essence of the motion, but it removes that…

Do you agree, Patricia?

[Patricia Lattanzio, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

[Inaudible—Editor] judges.

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant South—Six Nations, ON]

I'm going to have to agree with that, Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Miller]

Okay. We can formally or informally.... It looks like the committee unanimously agrees to remove that language—

[Patricia Lattanzio, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

“Erroneously” and “erronément”. Yes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Miller]

It's the word “incorrectly” in English.

In French, this would correspond to the words “de façon erronée”.

[Patricia Lattanzio, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

Yes.

(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Miller]

Again, we'll do a full reread for the purposes of the vote. I'll ask the clerk to do so. It will sound exactly how it sounded in the last couple of rounds, except it will remove the words “incorrectly” and “erronément.

Mr. Clerk, you have the floor.

[The Clerk]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

The motion as amended reads as follows:

That, given that the Supreme Court of Canada removed mandatory minimum sentences for offences related to child sexual exploitation, and ruled that these mandatory minimum sentences were cruel and unusual;

And given that the premiers of Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Ontario, as well as the Leader of the Official Opposition in Manitoba, have all publicly called for the use of the notwithstanding clause to overturn this decision;

The committee call on the government to table legislation to address sexual exploitation, reaffirming Parliament's unwavering commitment to protecting children and ensuring that offenders face the toughest sentences that our justice system allows, provided that the government table its legislative response to this Supreme Court of Canada ruling before the end of 2025, and that this motion be reported to the House.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Miller]

I want to make sure everyone understood that for the purposes of the vote, just to be entirely clear. I don't see any heads nodding in the wrong direction, so I'll assume that is a yes.

We can have debate or proceed directly to a vote.

(Motion as amended agreed to)

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant South—Six Nations, ON]

The original motion as amended is now carried, not just the amendment.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Miller]

There's a misunderstanding here.

[Patricia Lattanzio, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

We were supposed to vote on the amendment.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Miller]

Not on the motion as amended?

[Patricia Lattanzio, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

We have to go to the main motion once everything is complete.

Can we suspend, Mr. Chair?