(The House divided on the motion, which was negatived on the following division:)
House of Commons Hansard #132 of the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was affordable.
House of Commons Hansard #132 of the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was affordable.
This summary is computer-generated. Usually it’s accurate, but every now and then it’ll contain inaccuracies or total fabrications.
Instruction to Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security Conservative members move to split Bill C-22 into two parts to address government surveillance concerns effectively. Conservatives argue that splitting the bill would allow expedited passage of part 1 while providing necessary time to debate contentious provisions in part 2. Liberal members criticize the delay, characterizing Conservative tactics as an attempt to impede tougher crime measures and hinder law enforcement access to modern investigative tools. 4400 words, 1 hour.
Bill C‑20—Time Allocation Motion Members debate a time allocation motion for Bill C-20, which establishes "Build Canada Homes." Minister Gregor Robertson defends the new Crown corporation as essential for the housing crisis. Conservative MPs criticize creating a redundant housing agency without clear targets, while the Bloc Québécois requests flexibility for regions facing unique costs. The House then moves to a recorded vote. 4500 words, 30 minutes.
Build Canada Homes Act Third reading of Bill C-20. The bill proposes establishing Build Canada Homes as a Crown corporation to accelerate affordable housing delivery. Liberal members argue this necessary Crown corporation provides the autonomy and tools needed to increase housing supply. Conversely, Conservative MPs contend the legislation creates a fourth federal housing agency, arguing it imposes unnecessary bureaucracy without clear, measurable targets. Opposition members further claim the focus should remain on lowering construction costs rather than expanding federal administrative structures. 42100 words, 6 hours in 3 segments: 1 2 3.
Remarks by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Industry—Speaker's Ruling The Speaker rules on a question of privilege raised by the member for Louis-Saint-Laurent—Akiawenhrahk, concluding that the dispute over economic data interpretations does not constitute a prima facie case of intentionally misleading the House. 600 words.
Corrections and Conditional Release Act Second reading of Bill C-232. The bill mandates that dangerous offenders and multi-murderers remain in maximum-security institutions. Conservative members argue these serious criminal offenders require strict confinement to ensure public safety and respect victims, whereas Liberals and the Bloc Québécois contend such policies undermine rehabilitation efforts and favor punitive measures over evidence-based correctional practices. 7600 words, 1 hour.
Protecting Victims Act Third reading of Bill C-16. The bill, titled "the protecting victims act" (/debates/2026/6/9/anthony-housefather-2/), aims to update the Criminal Code to address modern crimes, including coercive control and online child exploitation. While the government argues the legislation strengthens protections for children and victims of gender-based violence, the Conservative opposition has criticized the inclusion of a "safety valve" provision (clause 63, /debates/2026/6/9/larry-brock-3/) that allows judges to bypass mandatory minimum penalties, arguing it undermines accountability for serious offenses. 25500 words, 3 hours.
Adjournment Debate - Marine Transportation Gord Johns criticizes the inequitable federal funding for BC Ferries compared to Atlantic Canada, arguing for a new support model. Caroline Desrochers defends the current arrangements, emphasizing the federal government's existing indexed contributions and reaffirming that ferry operations remain, by agreement, a primary responsibility of the British Columbia provincial government. 1400 words, 10 minutes.
The Deputy Speaker Tom Kmiec
I declare the motion defeated.
Pursuant to order made earlier today, it is my duty to interrupt the proceedings and put forthwith every question necessary to dispose of the third reading stage of the bill now before the House.
The question is on the motion.
If a member participating in person wishes that the motion be carried or carried on division, or if a member of a recognized party participating in person wishes to request a recorded division, I would invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.
The hon. parliamentary secretary to the government House leader.
The Deputy Speaker Tom Kmiec
Pursuant to Standing Order 45, the division stands deferred until Wednesday, June 10, 2026, at the expiry of the time provided for Oral Questions.
Lena Metlege Diab Liberal Halifax West, NS
moved that Bill C-16, An Act to amend certain Acts in relation to criminal and correctional matters (child protection, gender-based violence, delays and other measures), be read the third time and passed.
Anthony Housefather LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Emergency Management and Community Resilience
Mr. Speaker, I would like to start by seeking unanimous consent to share my time with the hon. member for Prescott—Russell—Cumberland.
Anthony Housefather Liberal Mount Royal, QC
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today at third reading of Bill C-16, the protecting victims act. This legislation reflects a simple but important principle: Our laws must keep pace with the realities that Canadians face today. Crime evolves. Technology evolves. The experiences of victims evolve—
The Deputy Speaker Tom Kmiec
I have to interrupt the hon. member.
The hon. member for Laurentides—Labelle on a point of order.
Marie-Hélène Gaudreau Bloc Laurentides—Labelle, QC
Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, we have no interpretation.
The Deputy Speaker Tom Kmiec
It is working now?
The hon. parliamentary secretary can pick up from where he left off. The interpretation is working again.
Anthony Housefather Liberal Mount Royal, QC
Mr. Speaker, crime evolves. Technology evolves. The experiences of victims evolve. Parliament has a responsibility to ensure that our criminal laws evolve as well.
The protecting victims act responds to the realities of modern victimization. It strengthens protections for victims and survivors. It addresses emerging forms of abuse and exploitation. It increases accountability for serious offenders. It provides law enforcement and the courts with additional tools to help keep Canadians safe.
Throughout the debate, we have discussed public safety, violence against women, child protection, online exploitation and victims' rights. These are not abstract issues. This is about real people. This affects families in every part of the country. They deserve a meaningful response from Parliament.
The protecting victims act directly addresses the concerns of victims, survivors, community organizations and justice system experts across the country. It aims to better protect vulnerable people and ensure that our laws reflect today's realities.
One of the most significant measures in the legislation would be the creation of a new offence of coercive control. For many years, survivors and advocates have told us that abuse begins long before physical violence occurs. Very often it begins with intimidation, isolation, manipulation or threats. It begins with a pattern of behaviour designed to dominate another person's life. Victims may be cut off from family and friends. Their finances may be controlled, their communications may be monitored, and their independence may gradually be taken away.
Taken together, these actions can create an environment of fear and control that has devastating consequences, yet too often, intervention occurs only after violence has escalated. Too often, warning signs are recognized only after a tragedy has occurred.
The protecting victims act would represent an important step forward. By creating a new offence of coercive control, Parliament would recognize that abuse is not defined only by physical violence, but that psychological abuse, emotional abuse and patterns of domination and control matter, and that victims deserve protection before violence escalates.
All too often, victims wonder why no one intervened sooner. Creating a new offence related to coercive control finally recognizes a reality that survivors have been describing for years. This measure gives authorities an additional tool to intervene earlier and better protect those at risk.
Another major focus of the protecting victims act is the protection of children. I believe that every member of the House can agree that children deserve to be safe, protected, and free from exploitation. Unfortunately, criminals increasingly use digital platforms to groom victims, distribute exploitative materials, engage in sextortion and facilitate abuse. The Internet has created tremendous opportunities, but it has also created new risks. The law must keep pace with those risks.
The protecting victims act would strengthen the legal framework related to child sexual exploitation and online abuse. It would make reporting requirements mandatory for social media companies when child sexual abuse material and exploitative content are identified. Canadians rightly expect digital platforms to act responsibly and to co-operate in protecting children from exploitation. Parents expect Parliament to respond when criminals use modern technology to target young people. The legislation would be exactly that response.
Protecting children should never be a partisan issue. The fight against the sexual exploitation of children should never be a partisan issue. We all have a responsibility to act when the safety of young people is at risk.
The protecting victims act would also respond to the growing threat of sexually explicit deepfakes and image-based abuse. Technology continues to evolve at an extraordinary pace. Artificial intelligence has created remarkable opportunities, but it can also be misused. We have seen disturbing images of sexually explicit images being created and distributed without consent. Women and girls have been disproportionately targeted by these harmful practices.
No one should have to fear that their likeness will be manipulated and weaponized against them. No one should have to endure the trauma of discovering that sexually explicit images have been created or shared without their consent. The protecting victims act would modernize the Criminal Code to address these realities and ensure that victims are protected, regardless of whether abuse occurs online or off-line.
Accountability is another important principle underlying the legislation. Canadians expect serious consequences for serious crimes. That expectation is reasonable and is reflected in the protecting victims act. The legislation would restore more than a dozen mandatory minimum penalties related to serious child sexual offences, would increase penalties for child predators and would strengthen the criminal justice response to some of the most serious crimes in our society. Children who experience sexual exploitation often carry that trauma throughout their life. Families are devastated. Communities are shaken. The consequences extend far beyond the immediate offence. Our justice system must respond accordingly.
The legislation would also recognize that victims need support throughout the justice process. For many victims, the crime itself is only the beginning of a difficult journey. Participating in criminal proceedings can be intimidating, stressful and retraumatizing. The protecting victims act would expand access to testimonial aids and support measures to help victims and witnesses participate more fully in the justice process.
The act would also expand access to support services for victims and witnesses. It would help make the justice system more accessible, more compassionate and more attuned to the needs of people who have already been through traumatic experiences.
These reforms would help improve the experience of victims, while supporting the broader goal of ensuring that justice is both done and seen to be done.
Yesterday, some members of the House voted against the protecting victims act at report stage. That was their decision, but they will have to explain to Canadians why they opposed legislation that would create a new offence of coercive control, strengthen protections for children and victims and restore minimum mandatory penalties for serious child sexual offences.
For our part, we are proud to support the legislation. We are proud to support victims, we are proud to support survivors, and we are proud to support safer communities. At the end of the day, the questions before us are straightforward: Do we believe victims deserve stronger protections? Do we believe children deserve greater safeguards against exploitation? Do we believe survivors deserve to be heard? Do we believe our laws should evolve to meet emerging threats? Do we believe Parliament should act when change is needed? I believe that the answer to all these questions is yes, and that is why I encourage everyone in this place to support the bill at third reading.
Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, I really appreciate how the member for Mount Royal set out the bill in such a manner that one would think it is very straightforward. We often hear members in the official opposition say that they want the government to deal with crime in a stronger way, and they talk about the importance of victims. Based on what we heard from the member for Mount Royal, one can easily come to the conclusion that this is legislation that one would expect the Conservative Party not only to vote in favour of but also to be anxious to have become law.
I wonder if the member could provide his thoughts regarding how we would have a better and healthier society by passage of the legislation.
Anthony Housefather Liberal Mount Royal, QC
Mr. Speaker, I always appreciate the parliamentary secretary's questions.
The goal of the current government is for people to both be safe and feel safe, and for communities to be safer. That is why the government brought forward an ambitious agenda of criminal reforms that would make it tougher for bad people and repeat offenders to get bail, would make sure victims of hate crimes have better access to police tools to prosecute those hate crimes, and, in this case, would make sure victims are protected, particularly women and children, who, in many different instances, disproportionately bear the threat of coercive control or exploitation.
The bill is an important piece of the tool kit, a tool in the tool kit for police and prosecutors. It is important for victims and other Canadians, and I encourage everyone to get on board and vote for the bill.
Kelly DeRidder Conservative Kitchener Centre, ON
Mr. Speaker, I completely agree that we need to keep our communities safe and to protect victims of any sort of violence and criminality in Canada, so I am going to ask a very simple question: If this is the true intent of the bill, why would the Liberals make mandatory minimum penalties optional?
Anthony Housefather Liberal Mount Royal, QC
Mr. Speaker, there is no reasonable way that the bill can be interpreted as making mandatory minimums optional. What the bill would do is prevent courts from striking down minimum mandatory sentences based on hypotheticals. This should be exactly the type of bill Conservatives would support. Conservatives have railed against what the courts have done to strike down minimum mandatory sentences based on hypotheticals.
I refer to the Senneville decision last year. This bill would restore minimum mandatory sentences and prevent courts from doing what was done in Senneville, by allowing courts to assess only the individual before them and not to strike down the entire category based on one hypothetical situation. The hon. member should read the bill again.
Marie-Hélène Gaudreau Bloc Laurentides—Labelle, QC
Mr. Speaker, I would like to know my colleague's thoughts about the study in committee of Bill C-16. The Conservatives made a lot of deliberate attempts to obstruct the work. While purporting to bring amendments beyond the scope of the bill, our colleagues engaged in endless filibustering.
Considering that we made some progress and that we support the bill, even though it may not be perfect, what does my colleague think of the Conservatives' behaviour?
Anthony Housefather Liberal Mount Royal, QC
Mr. Speaker, as my hon. colleague said, this legislation is a step forward. Everyone needs to be pragmatic. We will never get everything we want, but this bill is very good news for everyone who wants safer communities in Canada. It was unfortunate to have to sit in committee hour after hour as our colleagues tried to derail this bill.
Like the other justice bills that we introduced, this is something very important to Canadians.
Bardish Chagger Liberal Waterloo, ON
Mr. Speaker, I really appreciated the comments the member shared. I know we do not have a lot of time before the next member speaks, so I would just ask the member to perhaps use this time to share with Canadians what the bill would do, so we can minimize the misinformation or disinformation out there.
Anthony Housefather Liberal Mount Royal, QC
Mr. Speaker, one easy example is that of an AI-created sexual image of a person. Our previous law had not advanced to the point of addressing a person's having sexual images of them shared from AI. The bill would now cover that circumstance to make sure we can prosecute people doing something like that.
Giovanna Mingarelli Liberal Prescott—Russell—Cumberland, ON
Mr. Speaker, I rise in the House today to speak about an issue that demands not only our highest attention but also our sustained and collective action: violence against women and girls, and the protection of victims and survivors across Canada.
Violence against women is not abstract. It is not rare. It is not confined to headlines or statistics. It is happening in our communities, in our neighbourhoods and too often behind closed doors. It affects women of all ages, backgrounds and regions, including in my riding of of Prescott—Russell—Cumberland. This is why the protecting victims act would represent one of the most significant and necessary updates to Canada's criminal justice system in generations.
While broad in scope, the legislation can be clearly understood through four core pillars: first, tackling gender-based and intimate partner violence; second, protecting children from predators; third, strengthening victims' rights; and fourth, addressing court delays and strengthening system integrity. Together, these reforms would modernize the Criminal Code to respond to contemporary threats, intervene earlier to prevent violence and ensure that the justice system works faster, more fairly and more compassionately for victims and survivors.
Gender-based violence is rarely an isolated act. It is more of a cycle of control, fear and intimidation. This bill recognizes coercive and controlling behaviour, strengthens offences related to criminal harassment and modernizes the offence of non-consensual distribution of an intimate image to reflect the real harm caused by online sexual violence. It also recognizes the most tragic outcome of this violence by classifying femicide as first-degree murder, sending a clear message. Hate crimes and gender-based crimes will face the full extent of the law.
Children face growing risks in a digital world where predators increasingly use technology to exploit and harm. Police-reported child sexual abuse and exploitation offences are now more than 12 times higher than in 2008. This legislation would strengthen protections by expanding child luring offences and sextortion offences, addressing youth recruitment and restoring mandatory minimum penalties for the most serious child sexual offences, with a safety valve to ensure just and constitutional sentences. It would send a clear message: Crimes against children will always be treated with the utmost seriousness.
Justice is not just about convictions. It is also about how victims are treated at every step of the process. Too many survivors feel invisible, experience delays and are retraumatized by complex procedures. This bill strengthens the Canadian Victims Bill of Rights by building a trauma-informed, victim-centred justice system. It affirms victims' rights to respect and fairness, ensures the proactive disclosure of information, expands access to testimonial aids and clarifies victims' right to submit impact statements throughout the sentencing, parole and correctional system stages. It also improves information sharing so that victims are not left in the dark about decisions that affect their safety.
Delays in the justice system have serious consequences. Too often, cases involving sexual assault and violent crime collapse before they are ever heard. The protecting victims act would respond directly by requiring that courts consider alternatives before dismissing cases for delay, modernizing how unreasonable delay is assessed and streamlining procedures in sexual offence trials. It would also expand the use of alternative and restorative measures where appropriate and where public safety is not at risk, ensuring accountability while preserving fairness.
The urgency of this legislation cannot be overstated. In 2024 alone, 187 women were violently killed in Canada, which is nearly one woman every two days. Behind every number is a life lost, a family devastated and a community forever changed. Victims continue to face barriers, retraumatization, a lack of information, procedural complexity and delays that erode confidence in the justice system. National inquiries, provincial inquests and the national action plan to end gender-based violence have all called for stronger protections, earlier interventions and a more reliable justice process. This legislation would answer those calls.
Laws are important, but what happens on the ground is just as important. In my riding, Prescott—Russell—Cumberland, organizations like Maison Interlude show us what concrete, effective support looks like. For over 40 years, Maison Interlude has placed women who are victims of domestic violence and their children at the heart of its mission. Thanks to the leadership of pioneering feminists and the dedication of its staff, Maison Interlude has become a true lifeline for families fleeing violence.
That is why, last November, I was proud to announce, on behalf of the Minister of Housing and Infrastructure, more than $17 million in federal funding through the affordable housing fund to support the construction of 35 safe housing units in Embrun. This second-stage housing project will provide women and children fleeing violence with a safe, stable, and supportive living environment, an essential bridge between emergency shelter and long-term self-sufficiency. Each resident will receive personalized support to rebuild her life, regain her independence, and plan for a safer future. We will not only provide these women with a roof over their heads; we will offer them the stability and dignity they deserve. This is how policies come to life. This is how justice becomes tangible.
The protecting victims act is about accountability. It is about prevention, and above all, it is about dignity. It builds on earlier reforms and represents the next major step in strengthening safety and justice for Canadians. It reflects a clear commitment to protecting women, children and all victims of violence, in law, in practice and in our communities.
As we work to build Canada strong, we must ensure that strength is measured not only by economic independence, but also by how we protect the most vulnerable among us. I urge all members of the House to support this legislation and to stand with victims and survivors across Canada.
Marie-Hélène Gaudreau Bloc Laurentides—Labelle, QC
Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask my colleague the following question. The Bloc Québécois proposed an amendment that would correct a mistake and improve legal support.
I would like to know why the government members voted against that amendment when the rationale behind our proposal was sound and justified.
Giovanna Mingarelli Liberal Prescott—Russell—Cumberland, ON
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for that great question.
The bill establishes national standards under the Criminal Code while respecting provincial jurisdictions. The legislation already supports the provincial efforts in question.
Stephanie Kusie Conservative Calgary Midnapore, AB
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are saying that they are putting forward legislation in an attempt to make Canada safer, to be harder on criminals and to support victims of crime. However, in my own city of Calgary, in the last 10 days alone, we have had four shootings. What this is indicating to me is that Canada, under Liberal rule, is not any safer. I am really beginning to question, as I am sure many Canadians are, and I know certainly Calgarians are, if the legislation that the Liberal government has been putting forward for 10 years now is really contributing to a safer Canada.
I would like to know what the member thinks about that.