Debates of March 10th, 2026

Natural Resources

[Tim Hodgson, Liberal, Minister of Energy and Natural Resources]

Mr. Speaker, do members know who is tired of the conspiracy theories? The Conservative Premier of Nova Scotia is. The Conservative Premier of Nova Scotia stood beside us and said this is a great project. This is a project that creates jobs in Nova Scotia. This is a project that brings new energy to Nova Scotia. The Conservatives should get on board.

Indigenous Affairs

[Kristina Tesser Derksen, Liberal, Milton East—Halton Hills South, ON]

Mr. Speaker, on December 22, Canada submitted its plan for the long-term reform of first nations child and family services, which has the potential to transform care for our children and to address historic wrongs.

Can the Minister of Indigenous Services please speak to the contents of the proposal to the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal?

[Mandy Gull-Masty, Liberal, Minister of Indigenous Services]

Mr. Speaker, we have launched a new path forward to long-term reform of child and family services, one that acknowledges regional realities and puts first nations children and families first. This approach is supported by an ongoing commitment of over $35 billion for a seven-year period and $4.4 billion ongoing afterwards.

I want to ensure that children are connected to their families, cultures and communities. By seeking regional agreements, we are able to respect the distinct realities of first nations across the country. We are committed to moving ahead with urgency, care and responsibility.

Public Safety

[Bob Zimmer, Conservative, Prince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies, BC]

Mr. Speaker, to the Tumbler Ridge families of Zoey, Tiki, Abel, Ezekiel, Kylie, Shannda, Emmett and Jennifer, we say that we continue to grieve with them.

I thank our leader, the Prime Minister and all the federal leaders for making the trip to Tumbler Ridge to support us. I thank all members who have reached out over these last four weeks to give kind notes to me in some semblance of trying to pass on their peace to me.

I thank the people around the world who have been praying for the Tumbler Ridge community, who have been praying for Maya and other victims and who have been praying for me. Jesus has been the light to me in this darkness, as he has been to so many of the victims' families in this tragedy.

Tumbler Ridge families, though, are now are asking what can be done so this never happens again, so I ask the Prime Minister this: Will he commit today to a full public inquiry into the Tumbler Ridge tragedy?

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Minister of Public Safety]

Mr. Speaker, let me at the outset extend my deepest condolences to the families and to the community of Tumbler Ridge for the deep impact of what has happened in their community.

I want to acknowledge the incredible leadership of the member opposite, who has tirelessly worked for the last several weeks in supporting the community and ensuring that his community is supported.

I have had a number of conversations with the member over the last several weeks, and one thing I will say today and I will commit to is working with him and with the community to ensure that the right steps are taken. We will work in collaboration with the province of British Columbia.

We know that there are many unanswered questions. There is a coroner's inquest in progress, as well as an investigation on the internal affairs of policing, but our commitment to the people of Tumble Ridge is clear. We will seek and get the answers they demand.

Foreign Affairs

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Mr. Speaker, New Democrats' hearts also go out to all of the community in Tumbler Ridge.

The Prime Minister told the world in Davos that Canada will be “[p]rincipled in our commitment to...the prohibition of the use of force except when consistent with the UN Charter”. The attack on Iran by the U.S. and Israel clearly violates the UN Charter, as the Prime Minister himself has admitted, yet he supports it.

Will the Prime Minister explain to Canadians why he betrayed his commitment and now supports a war he knows is illegal?

[Anita Anand, Liberal, Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, we support Iran's never obtaining a nuclear weapon. That has been the policy position of successive governments of Canada. Iran must never have nuclear capacity.

The support is not a blank cheque. Canada reaffirms that international law binds all parties. Canada is a country of international law, and all actors, including the United States and Israel, must respect the rules of international engagement. These are established international processes—

[The Speaker, Francis Scarpaleggia]

The hon. member for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie.

Science and Innovation

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, there is a word for that: hypocrisy.

According to the Liberal slogan, we need to spend less in order to invest more. That sounds nice, but it is still nothing but empty words. In reality, the cuts are very real and they hurt. In many cases, they demonstrate a total lack of vision for the future.

The Liberals have decided to close the agricultural research and development centre in Quebec City. At a time when we need to ensure our food security, increase our productivity and reduce our environmental impact, this decision is tantamount to shooting ourselves in the foot.

Why lose this expertise and why abandon research that is crucial to our future?

[Heath MacDonald, Liberal, Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food]

Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member said, this is a difficult situation that we find ourselves in due to a lack of investment over a number of years through many governments. Maintaining our presence in every province, streamlining research and development and building a more collaborative science system that supports producers and strengthens our competitiveness is what this government is going to do. We are not going to put ourselves at an uncompetitive level at the national level or international level.

The House resumed consideration of the motion.

Government Business No. 6—Proceedings on Bill C-9

[Yasir Naqvi, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Trade and to the Secretary of State (International Development)]

Mr. Speaker, thank you for recognizing me and giving me an opportunity to speak on this motion. I know my colleagues are still working their way out of the chamber as we end question period, so I am just going to make sure that you are seated and that there is some time and space in the House so that I can speak.

Before I get into my comments, I want to start by saying that I will be sharing my time with the member for Nipissing—Timiskaming. She will be speaking for the latter 10 minutes.

The motion deals with Bill C-9, which is a very important piece of legislation that I am glad to have an opportunity to speak to. It is something I am really hopeful will pass through the House as soon as possible. In my role as the member of Parliament for Ottawa Centre, I have some history of working on the various provisions of Bill C-9, which are very much aimed at ensuring that we rid hate from our society and that we take all important necessary steps to ensure that people of all backgrounds and religions, including people who belong to the Jewish faith, the Muslim faith, the Christian faith and any other faiths, feel safe in practising their faith, in living according to their faith and in being able to visit places of worship. Bill C-9 tries to do this.

As many have spoken about in the House, the incidence of hate crimes is rising in Canada. The issues around anti-Semitism, Islamophobia and other forms of hatred are significant. It is incumbent on all of us to work together, not in a partisan fashion but as Canadians and as parliamentarians, to exercise our responsibility and duty to pass laws that would allow for the safety of our community and that would allow for our Jewish neighbours, our Muslim neighbours and our neighbours from other backgrounds to be able to live peacefully, as we are all supposed to do and as Canada was founded upon. Bill C-9 captures this.

This bill, as many members would know, proposes to do four important things. First, it would create two offences for obstruction and intimidation intended to prevent someone from accessing a place used by an identifiable group. I will speak to that particular provision in detail a little later, because it is something that I have been working on. Second, it would create a new stand-alone hate-motivated offence. Third, it would create an offence for wilfully promoting hatred through the public display of hate or terrorist symbols. Last, it would codify the Supreme Court of Canada's definition of “hatred” in the Criminal Code.

The most important part of this legislation is around making sure that people are not obstructed or intimidated when trying to access their place of worship, for example, somebody who wants to go to their synagogue on the Sabbath or somebody who wants to go to their mosque for jummah prayers. These are very important rights that we have as Canadians to practise our faith freely without any fear of harassment or intimidation.

This legislation would create a criminal offence around anybody trying to take away that particular freedom. There have been instances in my community here in Ottawa with various important institutions where members of the Jewish community regularly congregate or meet as a social space or even at a long-term care home. The Hillel Lodge, for example, where seniors who are mostly of Jewish faith live, was subject to a protest. Of course, that was extremely traumatizing and troubling for the members of the community.

I have been working very closely with our Jewish community here in Ottawa, for instance, with the Jewish Federation of Ottawa. I want to thank friends like Danya Vered and Adam Silver, who have championed and advocated for this legislation on behalf of the community to ensure that we create provisions and laws in our criminal courts that would not allow something like that to take place and that people can peacefully live their Jewish way of life and be able to practise their faith. Of course, this legislation is not just limited to the Jewish community. It applies to all faith communities.

There has been precedent to do this. This is not something unique. In my former role as the attorney general of Ontario, we brought in similar legislation at the provincial level to protect women accessing abortion clinics or sexual health clinics, so that they would not be harassed or intimidated from accessing the very vital right of access to medical care. We were able to do that through a piece of legislation, a safe access law, that has been held as being charter-compliant.

A similar principle, in my view, has been applied to this legislation, albeit federally, which will apply across the country. Of course, this is not a provincial offence but a criminal offence. However, the aim and the purpose is the same, which is to create safety around specific important places of worship, such as synagogues, mosques, churches, gurdwaras and mandirs. Also, most importantly, it would give an opportunity to individuals to access those places of worship or other important institutions. This is about individual rights.

Another example I will give that I have been quite concerned about in my community has to do with schools. We have had multiple instances in Ottawa Centre, in my community, where an elementary school has been used as a site for people to protest around gender identity. They felt that somehow kids were being brainwashed, that they should not be taught about gender identity and that they should not get an education around health and sexual well-being. They have been using an elementary school as a site of protest, which is highly inappropriate. If people want to protest a curriculum, they should go to the ministry of education or go to the school board's office to protest.

This is an important piece of legislation. This is a piece of legislation that my constituents have been asking for, for some time. In fact, I started working with them prior to the last federal election. I worked extremely hard to make sure that it would be in the platform of my party, the Liberal Party of Canada. I spoke about it during the election many times. I was really happy to see that it would be a part of Bill C-9, one of the earliest pieces of legislation that the government tabled.

However, in my view, the bill has been dragged all this time by unnecessary filibustering by the opposition. It is highly unacceptable. In fact, it is perpetuating an unsafe environment. We need to make sure that we pass laws like Bill C-9 as quickly as possible, because this is not a partisan issue. This is a matter of making sure that together we are protecting our communities.

I urge all members of the House, particularly my Conservative colleagues who talk a lot about hate crimes, and rightly so, to support Bill C-9 and support this motion, so that we can help build safer communities for everyone in our country.

[Andrew Lawton, Conservative, Elgin—St. Thomas—London South, ON]

Mr. Speaker, let me say perfectly clearly what Conservatives have said since the very beginning of the Bill C-9 discussion, which is that we stand united against hate. However, we cannot protect any community from hate with legislation that infringes on their rights. That is why Bill C-9 has been denounced in whole or in part by 350 Muslim organizations this morning, by the Rabbinical Council of Toronto, by the primate of the Anglican Church of Canada, by the United Church and by the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops.

Why does the member think that these concerns are unwarranted, when representatives of virtually every faith community in Canada have said that Bill C-9 will infringe on their religious liberties?

[Yasir Naqvi, Liberal, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, just like the member opposite, I have been meeting with many faith groups, and I have shared with them the same information I will share now.

We have something called the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Religious rights are protected within the charter. I think that relying on some sort of an exemption, which may have been created before the charter existed, is really misleading folks. What we need to focus on is that the charter has very robust protections when it comes to freedom of religion. Bill C-9 would not infringe upon that right whatsoever.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would be curious to know what my colleague's definition of “freedom” is.

There is an expression in Quebec, and I imagine it is used elsewhere: One person's freedom ends where another's begins. When people can commit a crime and justify hatred with religious texts, are they not infringing on the freedom of others?

Ultimately, there is a collective issue at stake here. Does it not involve the public interest?

[Yasir Naqvi, Liberal, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the most incredible thing about this country is that we always find a way to make sure that everybody's freedoms are protected. That is what the charter tries to do. It protects the rights and freedoms of people to make sure we can find that perfect space where we can all live in harmony, which is sometimes challenging to do. What we are trying to do is protect the cultural rights of people, which are embedded within the fundamental values essential to Canada and written in the charter. By working together, we can make sure we continue to build a harmonious society.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, Bill C-9 is a very serious piece of legislation that deals with combatting hate. The Conservative misinformation that gets pumped out through social media is very harmful.

Today, whether it is with respect to a church, a mosque, a gurdwara or a synagogue, nothing that is taking place today would be prevented in any fashion whatsoever with the passage of Bill C-9. That is an absolute truth. The Charter of Rights guarantees religious freedoms.

I wonder if my colleague could provide his thoughts on the damage caused by the misleading information that is coming out of the Conservative caucus.

[Yasir Naqvi, Liberal, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for raising a very important point. The games that the Conservatives are playing are very dangerous because they are making our communities and our society even more insecure at this moment.

All the Jewish community groups have been asking for this legislation. They support this legislation. They want this legislation to be passed. As we are seeing the rise of anti-Semitism, they are asking us to make sure that we take every step necessary to protect our places of worship. That is what we are trying to do. By impeding and delaying the bill, they are making our communities unsafe.

[Ted Falk, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I have been listening to the Liberals respond to the arguments and the debate all day long. They keep insisting that nothing will change with respect to religious speech and religious institutions. If nothing is changing, why remove the exemption in the first place?

[Yasir Naqvi, Liberal, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, there is obviously a very serious divide within the Conservative Party, as there are some who support the bill and others who oppose it. By bringing these arguments forward, its members are delaying the safety of society.

We have something called the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom, which protects everybody's religious freedoms. The charter remains in place.

[Andrew Lawton, Conservative, Elgin—St. Thomas—London South, ON]

Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, there may have been some background noise, but I believe the member said that the Conservatives are divided. Unlike the Liberals, we all stand for free speech.

[The Deputy Speaker, Tom Kmiec]

That is not a matter related to the Standing Orders, but a matter of debate.

[Pauline Rochefort, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Secretary of State (Rural Development)]

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour for me to follow in the footsteps of my hon. colleague from Ottawa Centre.

I rise today to speak to Bill C-9, the combatting hate act, and on the notice given to the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights this morning. I would like to start by addressing specific concerns with Bill C-9 that have been raised in my riding of Nipissing—Timiskaming. I would then like to explain why I am supporting Bill C-9 and why it is important for the bill to come before the House of Commons at this time.

In recent months, many citizens from my riding have contacted my office with letters, telephone calls and emails claiming that reading, teaching or discussing religious texts or beliefs would become hate speech under Bill C-9. They even claimed that pastors would no longer be able to read certain sections of the Bible out loud and that religious images would not be allowed in the schools their children attend. I would like to thank the residents of Nipissing—Timiskaming for reaching out and expressing themselves. I would also like to thank those who took the time to meet with me to explain their views.

Fortunately for all concerned, Bill C-9 is not about limiting our ability to peacefully pray, preach, interpret scripture or gather in the community to express our religious beliefs. It is not about preventing a pastor from reading out certain sections of the Bible. In fact, following the passage of Bill C-9, religious services and ceremonies in my riding of Nipissing—Timiskaming would continue just as they are proceeding now. That is because the right to express our faith is fully protected by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Under our charter, the expression of sincerely held religious beliefs will never be a crime.

What I think has made religious leaders and people in our communities a bit nervous is that there is a clause, the good-faith clause, present in the Criminal Code that would be removed as part of the amendments proposed to the bill. The clause was enacted in 1974, and in the 55 years it has been active, it has never been successfully used because courts have said the defence is redundant.

Sincerely held religious beliefs communicated accurately and in good faith will never constitute the promotion of hate. This good-faith clause was further rendered unnecessary, or as I say, obsolete, when in 1982, Canada approved the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. That is why the good-faith clause would be removed as part of a revision process for the Criminal Code.

It is in section 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms that our freedom of conscience and religion is guaranteed. It protects our right to hold, openly declare and manifest beliefs through worship, practice and teaching. The Supreme Court of Canada, in its interpretation of the charter, has long made clear that expressing sincerely held religious beliefs, even when those beliefs are very controversial, does not constitute the promotion of hatred.

Nonetheless, people are worried, and it is important to know that. That is why I thank the many residents of Nipissing—Timiskaming who have expressed their concerns, and in turn, I am very happy to advise that they have been heard.

After listening to feedback from religious leaders and parishioners, people from across Canada, an amendment has been proposed to the legislation that adds a certainty clause clarifying that peaceful religious expression is not captured by the legislation. This amendment would further reassure people what Canadian courts have consistently recognized, which is that peaceful practice and expression of religion are fully protected under the charter.

This is what good governance is all about. It is about listening to citizens, consultations and improved legislation. That is why I fully support Bill C-9. In a nutshell, for me, it is all about tackling that ugly, hate-motivated intimidation or unacceptable, hate-motivated violence that we are seeing in certain Canadian communities. To do that, the legislation would introduce three measures.

First, the legislation would create a new hate crime offence to be added to existing criminal acts when an act has been committed because of hatred. Moving forward, when a criminal act, such as an assault or vandalism, is committed, it would allow further prosecution if it was done because of hatred. It would also make the offence more serious. I should point out that, as my colleague has said, hatred has been defined by the Supreme Court of Canada, and it is being codified in the proposed Criminal Code amendment.

The second aspect of the legislation is that it targets the deliberate promotion of hatred through extremist symbols that are used to spread violence and violent ideas. At the same time, it includes clear exceptions for legitimate use, such as education or historical discussion. The intention is not to censor discussion, but to prevent the deliberate promotion of hatred.

Third, it would strengthen protections for places of worship, churches, schools and community centres by making it a criminal offence to intimidate or obstruct people from entering those places. Finally, as mentioned, it would add a “greater certainty” clause that would clarify that peaceful religious expression is not captured by the legislation.

For me, this is good legislation that is required, and I will say why. In recent years, hate crimes have more than doubled across Canada. Police services across our country are sounding the alarm, but police departments alone cannot solve the problem. They need a Criminal Code that has their back, a Criminal Code that provides clarity about what a hate crime is, a Criminal Code that would enable them to pursue charges and ensure that it would lead to prosecution. In my province of Ontario, the Ontario Association of Chiefs of Police is calling for clarity and consistency in how hate crimes are defined and classified. In other words, they want Bill C-9, as do legal experts and prosecutors.

That is why I tell my colleagues that as a government, we have an obligation to give the professionals who are protecting our communities the tools they need to do their job, but more so, as a government, we have an obligation to ensure that Canadians right across the land are protected from intimidation and violence because of their religious beliefs, ethnicity, sexual orientation or simply who they are.

While I realize this is a sensitive piece of legislation, at the same time, I think it is a grave error to be obstructing this legislation or distorting the facts about Bill C-9. That is why I supported this very important motion this morning. This will provide further opportunities for us, as a government, to examine the legislation, propose amendments and, hopefully, see it go to the Senate where it will again be further examined and debated.

I will close by thanking the 30 expert witnesses who came before the justice committee and provided expert opinions. I also thank the priests, parishioners and the citizens of Nipissing—Timiskaming who provided their comments. I stated that I will be voting in favour of the bill because I believe it would ensure the very thing that Nipissing—Timiskaming residents want, which is to live, worship, learn and gather in our communities, as they are doing now and can continue to do, free of fear, intimidation and violence motivated by hate.

[Ned Kuruc, Conservative, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask my colleague this: Do you agree with or denounce what the Minister of Canadian Identity and Culture said when he stated that prosecutors should have the discretion to press charges on some passages from Leviticus and Romans?

[The Deputy Speaker, Tom Kmiec]

I would remind members to be careful when using the word “you”. They should direct their questions and comments through the Chair and not directly to other members.

The hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Secretary of State for Rural Development.