Evidence of meeting #19 for Justice and Human Rights in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was interest.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Larry Brock Conservative Brantford—Brant South—Six Nations, ON
That's because it wasn't a priority for the Liberal government at the time.
Senior Counsel and Team Lead, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice
I can't speak to priorities.
I can tell you that it wasn't part of the Bill C-9 package.
Conservative
Larry Brock Conservative Brantford—Brant South—Six Nations, ON
Well, we can read between the lines. If it had been a priority, common sense indicates that we would have seen some reference in Bill C-9 from the Liberal government, telegraphing the removal of a religious defence that the religious community in Canada has enjoyed for 56 years—a law that was created by a Liberal prime minister, Pierre Elliott Trudeau, in 1970.
Deputy Director General and General Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice
I'm sorry. Is that a question?
Conservative
Larry Brock Conservative Brantford—Brant South—Six Nations, ON
No. I'm putting a statement on the record. I will ask questions, but I just wanted to put that on the record. Thank you.
Were you privy, then, to the change in direction the Liberal government made in late fall 2025, one that agreed with the Bloc that they would seek the removal of this defence? Were you consulted beforehand?
I'm not asking what the opinion was, so don't claim solicitor-client privilege.
Were you asked to provide a legal opinion—
Liberal
Liberal
Liberal
Patricia Lattanzio Liberal Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC
Mr. Chair, again, it's a question of relevance. The questions to officials are not—
Conservative
Larry Brock Conservative Brantford—Brant South—Six Nations, ON
For relevancy, I will go back to the subamendment by Andrew Lawton. Is that okay?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal James Maloney
Mr. Brock, I'm going to hear the point of order.
Go ahead, Ms. Lattanzio.
Liberal
Patricia Lattanzio Liberal Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC
Again, the questions and comments being made to officials and this committee have nothing to do with Mr. Lawton's subamendment. It is very clear what's happening before our eyes, yet again.
Mr. Chair, can we keep the questions and comments relevant to Mr. Lawton's subamendment?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal James Maloney
Yes, I think we all agree on that. I agree that the individuals here are responsible for drafting based on instructions, Mr. Brock. Maybe we can keep that in mind. Thank you.
Carry on.
Conservative
Larry Brock Conservative Brantford—Brant South—Six Nations, ON
Officials, were you involved in the drafting of Ms. Lattanzio's amendment?
Conservative
Larry Brock Conservative Brantford—Brant South—Six Nations, ON
Were you involved in the drafting of this particular amendment we're discussing today?
Senior Counsel and Team Lead, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice
Yes, we were involved with the drafting of Bill C-9.
Conservative
Larry Brock Conservative Brantford—Brant South—Six Nations, ON
There's my relevancy link.
You were involved in drafting—
Senior Counsel and Team Lead, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice
I'm sorry. What I said is that we drafted Bill C-9.
February 25th, 2026 / 6:10 p.m.
Conservative
Senior Counsel and Team Lead, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice
We continue to provide support to the minister's office, as requested, on various issues.
Conservative
Larry Brock Conservative Brantford—Brant South—Six Nations, ON
Absolutely.
There is my path to relevancy. Is that all right?
Ms. Lattanzio can continue to interrupt for the next 15 minutes. I'm not going to prevent her from doing that. That's her absolute parliamentary right. It's also my right to ask relevant questions. Relevancy is subjective. I have the right to ask questions that allow me to put a foundation before you, before I talk about the merits of Ms. Lattanzio's amendment, or lack thereof.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal James Maloney
I'm sorry. Can you clarify your answer? Were you involved in drafting the legislation but not the amendment? Is that correct?
Senior Counsel and Team Lead, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice
Thank you for the opportunity to clarify.
My answer is that we were involved in the drafting of the bill and that, following the beginning of the committee's study of the bill, we continue to provide support to the minister's office on the parliamentary process.
Conservative
Larry Brock Conservative Brantford—Brant South—Six Nations, ON
By extension, support could also include aiding with the drafting and the specific language used in Ms. Lattanzio's amendment, proposed subsection 11.1(1) and proposed subsection 11.1(2).
Is that correct?