Justice Committee on Dec. 9th, 2025

[The Chair, Liberal, James Maloney]

Good afternoon, everybody. I'd like to call this meeting to order. Thank you for being here.

First of all, this is my second meeting as chair. I hope we're able to get along as well as we did last meeting.

Welcome to meeting number 14 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights. Pursuant to the order of reference of October 1, 2025, the committee is meeting to continue the clause-by-clause study of Bill C-9, an act to amend the Criminal Code regarding hate propaganda, hate crime and access to religious or cultural places.

Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format, pursuant to the Standing Orders. Members are attending in person in the room and remotely using Zoom—I don't think they are. I'd like to confirm that sound tests were done successfully.

Before we continue, I ask all in-person participants to consult the guidelines written on the cards on the table. These measures are in place to help prevent audio and feedback incidents and to protect the health and safety of all participants, including and especially the interpreters. You will also note a QR code on the card, which links to a short awareness video.

I'd like to make a few comments for the benefit of the witnesses and members.

Please wait until I recognize you by name before speaking. For those participating by video conference, click on the microphone icon to activate your mic, and please mute yourself when you are not speaking. At the bottom of your screen, you can select the appropriate channel for interpretation: floor, English or French. Those in the room can use the earpiece and select the desired channel.

I will remind you that all comments should be addressed through the chair.

Members in the room, if you wish to speak, please raise your hand. Members on Zoom, please use the “raise hand” function. The clerk and I will manage the speaking order as best we can. We appreciate your patience and understanding.

I want to welcome the witnesses joining us today, who are back. From the Department of Justice, we have Kristen Ali, manager and senior counsel, criminal law policy section; Joanna Wells, senior counsel, criminal law policy section; and Marianne Breese, counsel, criminal law policy section.

Before we get started, I'll remind you that we are at clause 4, debating BQ-2, which is where we left off at the last meeting when it was adjourned. I'll also remind you that new clause 1.1 and clause 2 were also stood down.

Members, once again, if you have subamendments or new amendments, please provide them in writing and in both officials languages to the clerk.

(On clause 4)

Now, we're going to move to continue BQ-2 at clause 4.

[Anthony Housefather, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

I don't believe we're in the right.... I believe we're at LIB-1.

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

We passed that one.

[Anthony Housefather, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

It's to remove the word “swastika”. No, we didn't.

We deliberately went to all of the offences that related to the Attorney General, and we're supposed to come back. We did Ms. Idlout's amendment, which is NDP-1; we rejected it. Then we agreed, by committee, to go through all the ones that were related to the Attorney General. We should be back at LIB-1, which relates to the swastika.

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

I thought LIB-1 follows BQ-2.

[Anthony Housefather, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

On my thing it didn't. Does it?

[An hon. member]

Yes.

[Anthony Housefather, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

Okay. I apologize.

[The Chair, Liberal, James Maloney]

Are we all good? Okay. Thank you.

I'll just remind you that there are votes tonight. Bells are expected at around 5:15, give or take. We'll deal with that when we get to it.

We are ready to resume, then. We're on, just to be clear—

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

We're on BQ-2.

[The Chair, Liberal, James Maloney]

We're on BQ-2.

Before we move on to BQ-2—and I'll get back to Mr. Brock—I'll let you know that if BQ-2 is adopted, LIB-1, CPC-6 and CPC-7 cannot be moved due to a line conflict.

Okay, now we're ready to roll.

Do you have your hand up?

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

Thank you, Chair.

I have several comments to make, but I'll summarize as best I can.

It's clear that Bill C-9, given the deal that has been worked out between the Liberals and the Bloc, has become a lightning rod to religious organizations right across this country. I have been inundated, as have been several of my colleagues at this table and several colleagues in my caucus, by concerned members and religious leaders of all kinds of denominations stating that this is a direct attack on the freedom of expression and the freedom of religion. Given how toxic and how divisive this Bloc amendment is and will continue to be, now with Liberal support, we are at an impasse. It's no small wonder that an additional six hours of resources have been devoted to this meeting.

I also want to clarify the notion that the Conservatives have been deliberately blocking and filibustering any attempt by the government to prioritize and move to study Bill C-14. That is an absolute lie. It has been circulated for at least two weeks now in and outside of the House of Commons. One can only take a look at the dysfunction of this particular committee. The former chair of this committee has abruptly ended meetings and did not call meetings. I know our current chair also did the same last week. If that is not a deliberate stalling tactic on behalf of the Liberal government, I don't know what is.

It is clear that it will always continue to be the priority of the Conservative Party of Canada to address the elephant in the room, and that is the explosion of violent crime in this country. Since my election in 2021, I have been singularly focused on strengthening provisions in the Criminal Code that relate to bail and sentencing. I wasn't alone in this crusade. We've heard from premiers, we've heard from law enforcement, we've heard from victim advocacy groups and we've heard from municipal leaders, all advocating, pleading and begging for this government to take real action.

What did the government give us? It gave us a failed Bill C-48, which did nothing to stem the tide. We had an election. One of the issues in the election was community safety. We all heard about that knocking on doors. It was a real surprise to me and to members—

[Anthony Housefather, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

I have a point of order.

[The Chair, Liberal, James Maloney]

Mr. Housefather.

[Anthony Housefather, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

Mr. Chair, is this relevant to clause-by-clause?

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

Yes, it is. I'm getting to it.

[The Chair, Liberal, James Maloney]

I'll give Mr. Brock some latitude. He's been talking in anticipation of what may or may not happen in the future—

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

Yes.

[The Chair, Liberal, James Maloney]

—but we're not quite there yet.

If you're addressing this clause, Mr. Brock, you can continue.

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

We had an election. A number of issues were front and centre. Community safety and a government response to address community safety were front and centre. We all anticipated that when we returned to the House in the spring, one of the first hallmarks of this Carney government would be the introduction of bail legislation to deal with community safety. That didn't happen.

All through the summer I anticipated that some proposal, some policy, would be introduced that we would study in the fall. That didn't happen. Ultimately, Bill C-14 was introduced. We studied it. We looked at it in the House. We debated it in the House. It passed second reading. It is now waiting in the wings to be studied here.

I want to make this abundantly clear to everyone who is watching this particular proceeding, and to all of the groups who have an interest in community safety. I've always said and always will say that community safety is not a partisan issue. Regardless of political ideology, everyone wants to live in a safe community. Given the impasse we are at with respect to Bill C-9 and the Bloc's proposed amendment, I have a proposal, and that proposal is to seek unanimous consent from every member at this committee.

I'll read out the consent motion that I wish to adopt. I move that to improve public safety in our communities and to protect Canadians from repeat and violent offenders, the committee (a) immediately prioritize the consideration of Bill C-14, the bail and sentencing reform act and work together to report the bill to the House at the earliest opportunity; (b) sit through the winter adjournment to undertake meaningful consultations with victims, community leaders, police services and associations, and other relevant witnesses; and (c) pause consideration of Bill C-9 to make room on the agenda for Bill C-14.

With every day that we do not as a justice committee deal with Bill C-14, more murders are going to happen in our communities, more sexual assaults, more extortions, more car thefts—

[Wade Chang, Liberal, Burnaby Central, BC]

I have a point of order.

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

Victims are coming through loud and clear. They want this committee—

[The Chair, Liberal, James Maloney]

Mr. Brock, I'm sorry. We have a point of order.

Mr. Chang.

[Wade Chang, Liberal, Burnaby Central, BC]

How is this relevant to the consideration of the clause-by-clause of Bill C-9?

[The Chair, Liberal, James Maloney]

It's not. It's not relevant at all, in fact.

We're in the middle of clause-by-clause, Mr. Brock. I understand your point, but one point I take from your comments is that you want to move forward expeditiously, which I think we can all agree with—