← Your dashboard·HoC · 45-1passed
Official record· LEGISinfoHouse of Commons · Bill C-14

C-14 · Bail and Sentencing Reform Act

An Act to amend the Criminal Code, the Youth Criminal Justice Act and the National Defence Act (bail and sentencing)

Introduced Oct 23, 2025·Sponsor: Sean FraserLPCMEDIUM
AI-assisted analysis
At a glance
  • Amends the Criminal Code to tighten bail conditions for serious crimes involving violence and weapons.
  • Establishes stricter penalties for repeat offenders and expands the types of crimes that warrant tougher sentencing.
  • Clarifies legal definitions around youth offenses and improves procedures related to young offenders.
Accused individualsVictims of violent crimeYoung offendersLaw enforcement agenciesJudicial officials
AI-assisted analysis
What's actually in this bill
Full billAmendments to detention and release procedures
What it does

This part of the bill makes several amendments to the Criminal Code related to how individuals are detained, released, and sentenced in various circumstances, especially for serious offenses. It establishes stricter procedures for detention, including grounds for denying bail and conditions for release.

Why it matters

These changes could affect the balance between public safety and the rights of individuals accused of crimes. The modified procedures may lead to more individuals being detained before trial, which can impact their lives significantly if they are later acquitted.

The problem it addresses

This part seeks to address concerns about public safety and repeat offenses by ensuring stricter policies regarding detention and bail for certain crimes.

Who benefits

Public safety may benefit from stricter detention standards, potentially reducing violent crime rates by keeping repeat offenders in custody until trial.

The tradeoff

The most significant tradeoff is increased detention without bail for certain accused individuals, which primarily impacts their rights and freedom before trial. This could lead to unjust consequences for innocent individuals or those who do not pose a risk to society.

accused individualsvictims of crimelaw enforcementjudicial systemcriminal justice advocates
Read the actual text (87)
Short title

1This Act may be cited as the Bail and Sentencing Reform Act .

2(1) Paragraph (c) of the definition superior court of criminal jurisdiction in section 2 of the Criminal Code is replaced by the following: (c) in the Provinces of Nova Scotia, British Columbia, Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland and Labrador , the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court, (2) Paragraph (e) of the definition superior court of criminal jurisdiction in section 2 of the Act is replaced by the following: (e) in Yukon and the Northwest Territories, the Supreme Court, and

3The definition superior court in subsection 84(1) of the Act is amended by adding “and” at the end of paragraph (c) and by replacing paragraphs (d) and (e) with the following: (d) in Nova Scotia, British Columbia, Prince Edward Island, Newfoundland and Labrador and a territory, the Supreme Court; ( cour supérieure )

4Paragraph 145(5)(b) of the Act is replaced by the following: (b) is bound to comply with an order under subsection 515(12), 516.1(1) or 522(2.1) and who fails, without lawful excuse, to comply with that order.

5Paragraphs (c) and (d) of the definition court in subsection 164(8) of the Act are replaced by the following: (d) in the Provinces of Nova Scotia, British Columbia, Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland and Labrador, in Yukon and in the Northwest Territories, the Supreme Court, and

6(1) Paragraph 188(4)(c) of the Act is replaced by the following: (c) in the Provinces of Nova Scotia, British Columbia, Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland and Labrador , in Yukon and in the Northwest Territories, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court; (2) Paragraph 188(4)(e) of the Act is repealed.

7Paragraphs (c) and (d) of the definition court in subsection 320(8) of the Act are replaced by the following: (d) in the Provinces of Nova Scotia, British Columbia, Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland and Labrador, in Yukon and in the Northwest Territories, the Supreme Court, and

Discretionary order of prohibition — other offences

8Subsection 320.24(4) of the Act is replaced by the following: (4) If an offender is found guilty of an offence under section 220, 221, 236 or 320.13, subsection 320.14(2) or (3) or 320.15(2) or (3) or any of sections 320.16 to 320.18, the court that sentences the offender may, in addition to any other punishment that may be imposed for that offence, make an order prohibiting the offender from operating the type of conveyance in question during a period to be determined in accordance with subsection (5).

Sentences to be served consecutively — breaking and entering

9The Act is amended by adding the following after section 333.1: 333.11 (1) A sentence imposed on a person for an offence under subsection 333.1(3) or (4) shall be served consecutively to any other sentence imposed on the person for an offence under section 348 arising out of the same event or series of events. Sentences to be served consecutively — other offences (2) A sentence imposed on a person for a second or subsequent offence under subsection 333.1(3) or (4) shall be served consecutively to any other sentence imposed on the person for an offence arising out of the same event or series of events.

Aggravating circumstance — stolen property

10The Act is amended by adding the following after section 334: 334.1 (1) Without limiting the generality of section 718.2, when a court imposes a sentence for an offence referred to in section 322, 343, 348, 351 or 354, it shall consider as an aggravating circumstance the fact that the offence was committed with intent to sell or barter the stolen property or to fraudulently return it to a retail merchant. Aggravating circumstance — essential infrastructure (2) Without limiting the generality of section 718.2, when a court imposes a sentence for an offence referred to in section 322, 343 or 430, it shall consider as an aggravating circumstance the fact that the offence interfered with the access to or functioning of an essential infrastructure , as defined in subsection 52.1(2), or caused it to be unsafe or unfit for use.

Sentences to be served consecutively

11The Act is amended by adding the following after section 346: 346.1 A sentence imposed on a person for an offence under section 346 shall be served consecutively to any other sentence imposed on the person for an offence under any of sections 433 to 436 arising out of the same event or series of events.

12The heading before section 493 of the French version of the Act is replaced by the following: Définitions et interprétation

Clarification — indictable offence

13The Act is amended by adding the following after section 493: 493.01 For greater certainty, a reference to an indictable offence includes an offence that may be punishable on summary conviction if it is also an offence that may be prosecuted by indictment, unless the prosecutor has elected to proceed by way of summary conviction.

Clarification

14The Act is amended by adding the following after section 493.1: 493.11 (1) For greater certainty, section 493.1 does not require the accused to be released. Application (2) For the purposes of section 493.1, (a) a peace officer shall not release the accused if the peace officer believes on reasonable grounds that it is necessary in the public interest for the accused to be detained in custody under subsection 498(1.1), including for the safety and security of any victim of or witness to the offence; (b) a peace officer shall, if they release the accused, impose the least onerous conditions that are appropriate in the circumstances, namely, those that are necessary to address the risks posed by the accused as they relate to the purposes referred to in subsection 501(3), including the safety and security of any victim of or witness to the offence; (c) a justice or judge, as the case may be, shall not give primary consideration to the release of the accused at the earliest reasonable opportunity if the accused is one to whom subsection 515(6), 522(2) or 523(2.1) applies; (d) a justice or judge shall, if they release the accused, impose the least onerous conditions that are appropriate in the circumstances, namely, those that are necessary to address the risks posed by the accused as they relate to the grounds referred to in subsection 515(10), including the protection or safety of the public; and (e) a justice or judge shall not order that the accused be released if the detention of the accused is justified under subsection 515(10), including for the protection or safety of the public.

Arrest without warrant — application of section 524

15Section 495.1 of the Act is replaced by the following: 495.1 Despite any other provision in this Act, if a peace officer has reasonable grounds to believe that an accused has contravened or is about to contravene a summons, appearance notice, undertaking or release order that was issued or given to the accused or entered into by the accused, or has committed an offence while being subject to a summons, appearance notice, undertaking or release order, the peace officer may arrest the accused without a warrant for the purpose of taking them before a judge or justice to be dealt with under section 524.

Replacement or variation without consent

16Subsection 502(2) of the Act is replaced by the following: (2) The accused or the prosecutor may, in the absence of consent between them, (a) apply to a justice for a release order referred to in section 515 to replace an undertaking given by the accused under paragraph 498(1)(c), 499(b) or 503(1.1)(b) with the order; or (b) apply to a justice to vary the undertaking in respect of which the accused has been released under section 498, 499 or 503, in which case the undertaking so varied is deemed to be an undertaking given under section 498, 499 or 503, as the case may be. If the prosecutor makes the application , the prosecutor must provide three days’ notice to the accused.

Taking before justice

17The portion of subsection 503(1) of the Act before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following: 503 (1) Subject to the other provisions of this section, a peace officer who arrests a person with or without warrant and who has not released the person under any other provision under this Part or under section 705.1 shall, in accordance with the following paragraphs, cause the person to be taken before a justice to be dealt with according to law:

18Subsection 507(1) of the Act is amended by striking out “and” at the end of paragraph (a) and by adding the following after paragraph (a): (a.1) if a hearing is held, hold it in camera ; and

19Paragraph 507.1(3)(a) of the Act is replaced by the following: (a) has heard and considered, ex parte and in camera , the allegations of the informant and the evidence of witnesses;

20(1) Subsection 508(1) of the Act is amended by adding the following after paragraph (a): (a.1) if a hearing is held, hold it in camera ; (2) Paragraph 508(1)(b) of the Act is amended by striking out “or” at the end of subparagraph (i), by striking out “and” at the end of subparagraph (ii), by adding “or” at the end of subparagraph (ii) and by adding the following after subparagraph (ii): (iii) in the case of the undertaking, amend it to correct the time and place set out in the condition requiring the accused to attend court; and

Warrant — cancellation

21Section 511 of the Act is amended by adding the following after subsection (2): (2.1) Despite subsection (2), a judge or justice having jurisdiction in the territorial division in which the warrant was issued may cancel the warrant on application by the prosecutor, with or without the appearance of the accused, if the judge or justice is satisfied that it is in the interests of justice to do so.

Warrant to appear under section 524

22Section 512.3 of the Act is replaced by the following: 512.3 If a justice is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to believe that an accused has contravened or is about to contravene any summons, appearance notice, undertaking or release order that was issued or given to the accused or entered into by the accused or has committed an offence while being subject to any summons, appearance notice, undertaking or release order, the justice may issue a warrant for the purpose of taking the accused before a justice under section 524.

Non-application

23(1) Section 515 of the Act is amended by adding the following after subsection (2.03): (2.04) Subsection (2.01) does not apply to an accused to whom subsection (6) applies. (2) Subsection 515(3) of the Act is amended by striking out “or” at the end of paragraph (a) and by adding the following after that paragraph (a): (a.1) whether the accused is charged with an offence in the commission of which random and unprovoked violence was used or attempted; or (3) Subsection 515(4.1) of the Act is replaced by the following: Condition prohibiting possession of firearms, etc. (4.1) When the justice makes an order under subsection (2) in respect of an accused who is charged with any of the following offences , the justice shall add to the order a condition prohibiting the accused from possessing a firearm, cross-bow, prohibited weapon, restricted weapon, prohibited device, firearm part, ammunition, prohibited ammunition or explosive substance, or all those things, until the accused is dealt with according to law unless the justice considers that such a condition is not required in the interests of the safety of the accused or the safety and security of a victim of the offence or of any other person: (a) an offence in the commission of which violence against a person was used, threatened or attempted; ( b ) a terrorism offence; (c) an offence that is alleged to have been committed for the benefit of, at the direction of or in association with a criminal organization; ( d ) an offence under section 264 (criminal harassment); (e) an offence under section 346 (extortion); ( f ) an offence under section 423.1 (intimidation of a justice system participant); ( g ) an offence under subsection 423.2(1) (intimidation — health services); ( h ) an offence relating to the contravention of any of sections 9 to 14 of the Cannabis Act ; ( i ) an offence relating to the contravention of any of sections 5 to 7 of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act ; (j) an offence that involves, or the subject-matter of which is, a firearm, a cross-bow, a prohibited weapon, a restricted weapon, a prohibited device, a firearm part, ammunition, prohibited ammunition or an explosive substance; ( k ) an offence under subsection 20(1), 20.1(1), 20.2(1), 20.3(1) or 20.4(1) of the Foreign Interference and Security of Information Act , or an offence under subsection 21(1) or 22(1) or section 23 of that Act that is committed in relation to an offence under subsection 20(1), 20.1(1), 20.2(1), 20.3(1) or 20.4(1) of that Act. (4) Subsection 515(4.3) of the Act is amended by adding the following after paragraph (a): (a.1) an offence that is alleged to have been committed for the benefit of, at the direction of or in association with a criminal organization; (5) Paragraph 515(4.3)(b) of the Act is amended by replacing “264” with “264, 346”. (6) Section 515 of the Act is amended by adding the following after subsection (4.3): Additional conditions (4.4) Before making an order under subsection (2) in respect of an accused who is charged with an offence described in subsection 333.1(1), (3) or (4) or paragraph 348(1)(d), the justice shall consider whether it is desirable, in the interests of the safety and security of any person, particularly a victim of or witness to the offence or a justice system participant, to include as a condition of the order that the accused (a) abstain from going to any place or entering any geographic area specified in the order, except in accordance with any specified conditions that the justice considers necessary; (b) abstain from having in their possession any instrument specified in the order that is suitable for the purpose of breaking into any place or motor vehicle; or (c) return to and remain at their place of residence at the times specified in the order. (7) The portion of subsection 515(6) of the Act before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following: Order of detention (6) Unless the accused, having been given a reasonable opportunity to do so, shows cause why the accused’s detention in custody is not justified by clearly demonstrating that their proposed release plan addresses the risks posed by the accused as they relate to the grounds referred to in subsection (10) , the justice shall order, despite any provision of this section, that the accused be detained in custody until the accused is dealt with according to law, if the accused is charged (8) Subparagraph 515(6)(a)(iv) of the English version of the Act is replaced by the following: (iv) that is an offence under subsection 16(1) or (2), 17(1), 19(1), 20(1), 20.1(1), 20.3(1), 20.4(1) or 22(1) of the Foreign Interference and Security of Information Act , (9) Paragraph 515(6)(a) of the Act is amended by striking out “or” at the end of subparagraph (vii) and by adding the following after subparagraph (viii): (ix) that is an offence under any of sections 266 to 268 and 271 to 273 in the commission of which the accused is alleged to have choked, suffocated or strangled the complainant, (x) that is an offence under section 279.01 or 279.011, (xi) that is an offence under subsection 333.1(3) or (4), (xii) that is an offence under subsection 346 in the commission of which violence was allegedly used, threatened or attempted against any person, (xiii) that is an offence under paragraph 348(1)(d), or (xiv) that is an offence under section 117 or 118 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act ; (10) Paragraph 515(6)(b.2) of the Act is replaced by the following: (b.2) with an offence in the commission of which violence was allegedly used, threatened or attempted against a person with the use of a weapon, and the accused has been previously convicted, within 10 years of the day on which they were charged for that offence, of another offence in the commission of which violence was also used, threatened or attempted against any person with the use of a weapon, if the maximum term of imprisonment for each of those offences is 10 years or more; (11) Paragraph 515(10)(c) of the Act is amended by striking out “and” at the end of subparagraph (iii), by adding “and” at the end of subparagraph (iv) and by adding the following after subparagraph (iv): (v) the number or gravity of any outstanding charges against the accused that arise out of separate events.

Adjournment of proceedings

24Section 516 of the Act is replaced by the following: 516 A justice may, before or at any time during the course of any proceedings under section 515, on application by the prosecutor or the accused, adjourn the proceedings and remand the accused to custody in prison by warrant in Form 19, but no adjournment shall be for more than three clear days except with the consent of the accused.

Remand in custody — non-communication order

516.1(1) A justice who remands an accused to custody under subsection 503(3) or 515(11) or section 516 may order that the accused abstain from communicating, directly or indirectly, with any victim, witness or other person identified in the order, except in accordance with any conditions specified in the order that the justice considers necessary. Duration of order (2) An order made under subsection ( 1 ) remains in force, (a) until it is varied or revoked; (b) until an order in respect of the accused is made under section 515; (c) until the accused is acquitted of the offence, if applicable; or (d) until the time the accused is sentenced, if applicable.

Review of order

25(1) Subsection 520(1) of the Act is replaced by the following: 520 (1) If a judge or justice makes an order under subsection 515(2), (5), (6), (7) or (12) or vacates, varies or makes any order under paragraph 523(2)(b), the accused may, at any time before the trial of the charge, apply to a judge for a review of the order.

Review of order

26(1) Subsection 521(1) of the Act is replaced by the following: 521 (1) If a judge or justice makes an order under subsection 515(1), (2), (7) or (12) or vacates, varies or makes any order under paragraph 523(2)(b), the prosecutor may, at any time before the trial of the charge, apply to a judge for a review of the order.

Idem

27(1) Subsection 522(2) of the Act is replaced by the following: (2) Where an accused is charged with an offence listed in section 469, a judge of or a judge presiding in a superior court of criminal jurisdiction for the province in which the accused is charged shall order that the accused be detained in custody unless the accused, having been given a reasonable opportunity to do so, shows cause why their detention in custody is not justified within the meaning of subsection 515(10) by clearly demonstrating that their proposed release plan addresses the risks posed by the accused as they relate to the grounds referred to in that subsection . (2) Section 522 of the Act is amended by adding the following after subsection (3): Non-application (3.1) For the purposes of subsection (3), subsection 515(2.01) does not apply to an accused referred to in subsection (2).

Period for which appearance notice, etc., continues in force

28(1) Subsection 523(1) of the Act replaced by the following: 523 (1) Subject to subsection (2) , if an accused, in respect of an offence with which they are charged, has not been taken into custody or has been released from custody under any provision of this Part, the appearance notice, summons, undertaking or release order issued to, given or entered into by the accused continues in force, subject to its terms, and applies in respect of any new information charging the same offence or an included offence that was received after the appearance notice, summons, undertaking or release order was issued, given or entered into, (a) if the accused is, at their trial, determined to be guilty of an offence listed in section 469 , until their trial is completed; (b) if the accused is, at their trial, determined to be guilty of an offence other than an offence listed in section 469 , until a sentence within the meaning of section 673 is imposed on the accused; or (c) in any other case, until their trial is completed.

Detention or release order

29(1) Paragraph 524(2)(b) of the Act is replaced by the following: (b) the accused has been arrested for having committed an offence while being subject to a summons, appearance notice, undertaking or release order and the prosecutor seeks to have it cancelled under this section. (2) Paragraph 524(3)(b) of the Act is replaced by the following: (b) there are reasonable grounds to believe that the accused has committed an offence while being subject to the summons, appearance notice, undertaking or release order. (3) Subsections 524(4) and (5) of the Act are replaced by the following: (4) If the judge or justice cancels the summons, appearance notice, undertaking or release order, they shall conduct a proceeding under section 515 in respect of the outstanding charges against the accused and order the release or detention of the accused on cause being shown in accordance with that section . Clarification — onus (5) For the purposes of subsection (4), if any of the outstanding charges include charges for an offence referred to in subsection 515(6) or 522(2), the judge or justice shall order that the accused be detained in custody unless the accused, having been given a reasonable opportunity to do so, shows cause why their detention in custody is not justified under subsection 515(10) by clearly demonstrating that their proposed release plan addresses the risks posed by the accused as they relate to the grounds referred to in that subsection.

Clarification

30(1) Section 525 of the Act is amended by adding the following after subsection (4): (4.1) For greater certainty, if in conducting the hearing referred to in subsection (1) the judge conducts a proceeding under section 515, they shall order the release or detention of the accused on cause being shown in accordance with that section. (2) Section 525 of the Act is amended by adding the following after subsection (5): Detention order (5.1) If the judge does not make a release order under subsection (5), the judge shall make an order that the accused continue to be detained. The order is deemed to be a detention order made under section 515. Clarification — further hearing (5.2) For greater certainty, after an order is made under subsection (5.1), no further hearing under this section shall be held unless required by the judge under paragraph (4)(b).

Detention in other cases

31The portion of subsection 527(5) of the English version of the Act before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following: (5) If the appearance of a prisoner is required for the purposes of subsection (1), the judge or provincial court judge shall give appropriate directions in the order with respect to the manner in which the prisoner is

32Paragraph (h.1) of the definition judge in section 552 of the Act is replaced by the following: (h.1) in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, a judge of the Supreme Court,

33Subparagraph 561(1)(b)(ii) of the French version of the Act is replaced by the following: (ii) tout mode de procès avec le consentement écrit du poursuivant.

Remote appearance

34Subsection 672.5(13) of the Act is replaced by the following: (13) If the accused so agrees, the court or the chairperson of the Review Board may permit the accused to appear by videoconference for any part of the hearing. Remote appearance — compelling circumstances (13.01) Despite subsection (13), the court or Review Board may order their appearance by audioconference or videoconference if the court or Review Board determines that compelling circumstances exist to do so. Audioconference only (13.02) The court or Review Board may allow the accused to appear by audioconference only if it is satisfied that (a) videoconferencing is not readily available; and (b) the appearance by audioconference would permit the court or Review Board to conduct the proceedings effectively despite not seeing the accused. Factors (13.03) When deciding whether to make an order under subsection (13.01), the court or Review Board must take into account the following factors: (a) the accused’s right to a review of their disposition; (b) the location and personal circumstances of the accused, including any potential adverse effects of an audioconference or videoconference on the accused’s mental condition; (c) the suitability of the available technology and the location from where the parties will participate in the hearing; (d) the accused’s opportunity to communicate privately with legal counsel, if they are represented, or to have access to legal advice during the hearing; (e) the subject matter and the anticipated complexity of the hearing; and (f) any other factor that the court or Review Board considers relevant. Written reasons (13.04) If the court or Review Board decides to make the order, it must provide reasons in writing.

Witness — warrant endorsement

35Section 705 of the Act is amended by adding the following after subsection (3): (4) A court, judge, justice or provincial court judge that issues a warrant under this section may, by making an endorsement on the warrant in Form 29.1, authorize the release of the person referred to in the warrant, on an undertaking with conditions. Conditions — undertaking (5) The court, judge, justice or provincial court judge that endorses the warrant must include any conditions of the undertaking that the court, judge, justice or provincial court judge considers necessary to ensure that the person will appear and give evidence in the proceeding. Apply to vary undertaking (6) The person referred to in subsections (1) or (2) may apply to the court, judge, justice or provincial court judge to vary the undertaking in respect of which they have been released. Deeming (7) An undertaking that is varied under subsection (6) is deemed to be an undertaking given under section 705.1.

Release — undertaking

36The Act is amended by adding the following after section 705: 705.1 (1) If a person has been arrested by a peace officer under a warrant issued under subsection 705(1) or (2) and the warrant has been endorsed under subsection 705(4), a peace officer may release the person if they give an undertaking in Form 10.1. Information required (2) The undertaking must set out (a) the name, date of birth and contact information of the person; and (b) information about the proceeding in which the person was served a subpoena or bound by a recognizance, to attend to give evidence. Mandatory conditions (3) The undertaking must include a condition that the person attend court at the time and place stated in the undertaking and to attend afterwards as required by the court. Other conditions (4) The undertaking must include any condition that is imposed by the court, judge, justice or provincial court judge under subsection 705(5) and set out in the endorsement made in Form 29.1. Signature — witness (5) The person referred to in subsection 705(1) or (2) shall be requested to sign in duplicate their undertaking and, whether or not they comply with that request, one of the duplicates shall be given to them. Lack of signature — refusal or failure (6) If the person fails or refuses to sign, the lack of the person’s signature does not invalidate the undertaking. Conditions in effect (7) The conditions with respect to the undertaking remain in effect until they are cancelled or changed or until the person appears and remains in attendance at the proceeding as required by the mandatory condition.

Punishment

37Subsection 708(2) of the Act is replaced by the following: (2) A court, judge, justice or provincial court judge may deal summarily with a person who is guilty of contempt of court under this section and that person is liable to a fine not exceeding $5,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years less a day , or to both, and may be ordered to pay the costs that are incident to the service of any process under this Part and to that person’s detention, if any.

Objectives — offence of motor vehicle theft when violence used

38The Act is amended by adding the following after section 718.04: 718.05 If a court imposes a sentence for a second or subsequent offence under subsection 333.1(3), it shall give primary consideration to the objectives of denunciation and deterrence of the conduct that forms the basis of the offence.

Objectives — offence of breaking and entering

718.06If a court imposes a sentence for a second or subsequent offence under section 348, it shall give primary consideration to the objectives of denunciation and deterrence of the conduct that forms the basis of the offence.

Objectives — offence for the benefit of a criminal organization

718.07If a court imposes a sentence for an offence that is committed for the benefit of, at the direction of or in association with a criminal organization, it shall give primary consideration to the objectives of denunciation and deterrence of the conduct that forms the basis of the offence.

39(1) Subparagraph 718.2(a)(iii.2) of the Act is replaced by the following: (iii.2) evidence that the offence was committed against a person who, in the performance of their duties and functions, was providing health services, including personal care services, or was providing services as a first responder , (2) Paragraph 718.2(a) of the Act is amended by striking out “and” at the end of subparagraph (vi), by adding “and” at the end of subparagraph (vii) and by adding the following after subparagraph (vii): (viii) evidence that the offence was committed with the use of violence, threats or attempts of violence against another person and that the offender has been convicted, within the previous five years, of one or more such offences,

40Paragraph 718.3(4)(b) of the Act is amended by striking out “or” at the end of subparagraph (ii), by adding “or” at the end of subparagraph (iii) and by adding the following after subparagraph (iii): (iv) one of the offences was committed with the use of violence, threats or attempts of violence against another person and the accused has been convicted, within the previous five years, of one or more such offences.

41Section 734.5 of the Act is amended by striking out “or” at the end of paragraph (a), by adding “or” at the end of paragraph (b) and by adding the following after paragraph (b): (c) where the proceeds of the fine belong to His Majesty in right of Canada by virtue of subsection 734.4(2), the person responsible, by or under an Act of the legislature of a province, for issuing, renewing or suspending a licence, permit or other similar instrument in relation to the offender may refuse to issue or renew or may suspend the licence, permit or other instrument until the fine is paid in full, proof of which lies on the offender.

Compensation agreements

42The Act is amended by adding the following after section 734.5: 734.51 (1) The Attorney General of Canada may enter into an agreement with the government of a province or with any provincial, municipal or local authority (a) respecting the sharing with that province or authority of the amounts in respect of fines that are collected in respect of the prosecution of offences commenced under this Act or any other Act of Parliament, for the purpose of providing for compensation by Canada to that province or authority, in whole or in part, for the administration and enforcement of this Act or any other Act of Parliament; and (b) despite subsections 17(1) and (4) of the Financial Administration Act , authorizing the government of the province or the authority to withhold amounts, in accordance with the terms and conditions of the agreement, from the fines referred to in paragraph (a) to be remitted to the Receiver General and deposited in the Consolidated Revenue Fund. Appropriation by Parliament (2) All or a portion of the amount of fines referred to in paragraph (1)(a) that are to be shared under an agreement are deemed to be appropriated by Parliament for that purpose.

43(1) Paragraph 742.1(c) of the Act is amended by striking out “or” at the end of subparagraph (ii) and by adding the following after subparagraph (ii): (ii.1) section 272 (sexual assault with a weapon, threats to a third party or causing bodily harm), (ii.2) section 273 (aggravated sexual assault), or (2) Section 742.1 of the Act is amended by striking out “and” at the end of subparagraph (c)(iii) and by adding the following after paragraph (c): (c.1) the offence is not an offence, prosecuted by way of indictment, under any of the following provisions: (i) section 153.1 (sexual exploitation of person with disability), or (ii) section 271 (sexual assault); (c.2) the offence is not an offence, prosecuted by way of indictment, of a sexual nature, or committed for a sexual purpose, that involves a victim under 18 years of age; and

44(1) Paragraph 745.6(3)(c) of the Act is repealed. (2) Paragraph 745.6(3)(e) of the Act is replaced by the following: (e) in relation to the Provinces of Nova Scotia, British Columbia, Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland and Labrador , the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court; and

45(1) Paragraph 812(1)(c) of the Act is replaced by the following: (c) in the Provinces of Nova Scotia, British Columbia, Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland and Labrador , the Supreme Court; (2) Paragraph 812(1)(g) of the Act is repealed.

46The reference to “The Trial Division of the Supreme Court” in column II of the schedule to Part XXV of the Act, opposite “Newfoundland and Labrador” in column I, is replaced by a reference to “The Supreme Court”.

47The paragraph of Form 6 of Part XXVIII of the Act that begins with “If you do not comply” and ends with “(Subsection 524(4) of the Criminal Code ).” is replaced by the following: If you do not comply with this summons or are charged with committing an offence after it has been issued to you, this summons may be cancelled and, as a result, you may be detained in custody (subsection 524(4) of the Criminal Code ).

48The paragraph of Form 6.2 of Part XXVIII of the Act that begins with “If you are on interim release” and ends with “(section 524 of the Criminal Code ).” is replaced by the following: If you are on interim release and do not comply with this summons or are charged with committing an offence after it has been issued to you, any summons, appearance notice, undertaking or release order to which you are subject may be cancelled and, as a result, you may be detained in custody (section 524 of the Criminal Code ).

49Paragraph (e) of Form 8 of Part XXVIII of the Act is replaced by the following: □ (e) there are reasonable grounds to believe that the accused has committed an offence after having become subject to the (summons or appearance notice or undertaking or release order) and the detention of the accused in custody is justified [515(10), 524(3) and (4)];

50The paragraph of section 6 of Form 9 of Part XXVIII of the Act that begins with “If you do not comply” and ends with “(subsection 524(4) of the Criminal Code ).” is replaced by the following: If you do not comply with this appearance notice or are charged with committing an offence after you have been released, this appearance notice may be cancelled and, as a result, you may be detained in custody (subsection 524(4) of the Criminal Code ).

51(1) Section 7 of Form 10 of Part XXVIII of the Act is replaced by the following: 7 Variation and Replacement The conditions of this undertaking may be varied with the written consent of the prosecutor and yourself. In addition, you or the prosecutor may apply to a justice of the peace to replace this undertaking with a release order under section 515 of the Criminal Code . Finally, you or the prosecutor may apply to a justice of the peace to vary this undertaking. (2) The paragraph of section 9 of Form 10 of Part XXVIII of the Act that begins with “If you do not comply” and ends with “(subsection 524(4) of the Criminal Code ).” is replaced by the following: If you do not comply with this undertaking or are charged with committing an offence after you have been released, this undertaking may be cancelled and, as a result, you may be detained in custody (subsection 524(4) of the Criminal Code ).

52Part XXVIII of the Act is amended by adding the following after Form 10: FORM 10.1 (Subsection 705(4)) Undertaking — Witness Canada, Province of , ( territorial division ). 1 Identification Surname: Given name(s): Date of Birth: 2 Contact Information 3 Proceeding in which you were served a subpoena or bound by a recognizance, to attend to give evidence Whereas A.B. has been charged that ( state offence as in the information ), and it has been made to appear that you are likely to give material evidence and/or bring with you anything in your possession or under your control that relates to the said charge. 4 Mandatory Condition You must attend court as indicated below, and afterwards as required by the court: Date: Time: Court number: Court address: 5 Conditions determined by the court, judge, justice or provincial court judge You must also comply with the following conditions ( reproduce the conditions determined by the court, justice or provincial court judge as set out in Form 29.1 ): 6 Conditions in effect The mandatory condition and the conditions determined by the court, judge, justice or provincial court judge on this undertaking remain in effect until they are cancelled or changed or until you appear and remain in attendance at the proceeding as required by the mandatory condition (section 763 of the Criminal Code ). 7 Variation The conditions of this undertaking may be varied by application to the court, judge, justice or provincial court judge. 8 Consequence for non-compliance You are warned that, unless you have a lawful excuse, you commit an offence under section 145 of the Criminal Code if you fail to follow any of the conditions set out in this undertaking, including (a) if you fail to attend court as required; or (b) if you fail to comply with the conditions determined by the court, judge, justice or provincial court judge. If you commit an offence under section 145 of the Criminal Code , a warrant for your arrest may be issued (section 512 or 512.2 of the Criminal Code ) and you may be liable to a fine or to imprisonment, or to both. 9 Signatures WITNESS: I understand the contents of this undertaking and agree to comply with the mandatory condition and the conditions determined by the court, judge, justice or provincial court judge. I understand that I do not have to accept the conditions and that, if I do not accept the conditions, I will be brought before a court, judge, provincial court judge or justice under sections 705 and 706 of the Criminal Code . Signed on ( date ) , at ( place ) . ( Signature of witness ) PEACE OFFICER: Signed on ( date ) , at ( place ) ( Signature of peace officer ) ( Name of the peace officer )

53The paragraph of item 8 of Form 11 of Part XXVIII of the Act that begins with “If you do not comply” and ends with “(subsection 524(4) of the Criminal Code ).” is replaced by the following: If you do not comply with this release order or are charged with committing an offence after you have been released, this release order may be cancelled and, as a result, you may be detained in custody (subsection 524(4) of the Criminal Code ).

54Form 12 of Part XXVIII of the Act is amended by adding the following after section 7: 7.1 Financial Information Annual Income ................... Assests (nature and value) ................... Other ...................

55Part XXVIII of the Act is amended by adding the following after Form 29: FORM 29.1 (Subsection 705(4)) Endorsement of Witness — Warrant Canada, Province of , ( territorial division ). Whereas this warrant is issued under subsection 705(1) or (2) of the Criminal Code in respect of a witness who has been served with a subpoena to give evidence in a proceeding or who has been bound by a recognizance to attend and give evidence in a proceeding, I authorize the release of that person under subsections 705(4) and (5) of that Act. This endorsement is subject to the following conditions: ( specify conditions ). Dated ( date ) , at ( place ) ( Signature of judge, justice or provincial court judge )

Words and expressions

56Unless the context requires otherwise, words and expressions used in sections 57 and 58 have the same meaning as in the Criminal Code .

Outstanding fines

57The provisions of the Criminal Code , as enacted by sections 41 and 42 , apply to the proceeds of a fine that is unpaid on the day on which those sections come into force.

Clarification — certain offences

58(1) For greater certainty, the provisions of the Criminal Code , as enacted by sections 8 , 9 , 11 , 37 and 43 , apply only with respect to an offence that is committed on or after the day on which those sections come into force. Clarification — Parts XVI and XXVIII (2) For greater certainty, the amendments to Parts XVI and XXVIII of the Criminal Code made by this Act apply with respect to any matter or proceeding under that Part XVI that is ongoing on the day on which section 12 comes into force. Clarification — Application (3) For greater certainty, the provisions of the Criminal Code , as enacted by sections 10 , 34 to 36 and 38 to 40 , also apply with respect to any matter or proceeding that is ongoing on the day on which those sections come into force.

59Paragraph (a) of the definition violent offence in subsection 2(1) of the Youth Criminal Justice Act is replaced by the following: (a) an offence in the commission of which a young person causes bodily harm;

Evidence of measures is inadmissible

60Section 9 of the Act is replaced by the following: 9 Evidence that a young person has received a warning, caution or referral mentioned in section 6, 7 or 8 or that a police officer has taken no further action in respect of an offence, and evidence of the offence, is inadmissible for the purpose of proving prior offending behaviour in any proceedings before a court in respect of the young person.

Youth justice court may make rules

61(1) Subsection 17(1) of the Act is replaced by the following: 17 (1) The youth justice court for a province may, for the purpose of regulating proceedings within its jurisdiction, establish rules of court not inconsistent with this Act or any other Act of Parliament or with any regulations made under section 155.

Release order with conditions

62The portion of subsection 29(1) of the Act before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following: 29 (1) A youth justice court judge or a justice may impose a condition set out in subsections 515(4) to (4.4) of the Criminal Code in respect of a release order only if they are satisfied that

63Paragraph 42(13)(b) of the Act is replaced by the following: (b) is found guilty of more than one offence for each of which a sentence referred to in any of those paragraphs is imposed .

Reasons — credit for time in detention

64The Act is amended by adding the following after section 49: 49.1 (1) The youth justice court shall give reasons for any credit granted for the time spent in detention by the young person as a result of the offence and shall cause those reasons to be stated in the record of the case. Record of proceedings (2) The youth justice court shall cause to be stated in the record of the case and on the warrant of committal the offence, the amount of time spent in detention, the term of the custody and supervision order that would have been imposed before any credit was granted, the amount of time credited, if any, and the sentence imposed. Validity not affected (3) Failure to comply with subsection (1) or (2) does not affect the validity of the sentence imposed by the court.

65Subsection 56(5) of the Act is amended by striking out “or” at the end of paragraph (a), by adding “or” at the end of paragraph (b) and by adding the following after paragraph (b): (c) if a young person is subject to a deferred custody and supervision order, at the end of the period set out in that order.

Transfer of youth sentence

66Subsection 57(1) of the Act is replaced by the following: 57 (1) When a youth sentence has been imposed under any of paragraphs 42(2)( c ) to (i), (k), (l) or (s) in respect of a young person and the young person or a parent with whom the young person resides is or becomes a resident of a territorial division outside the jurisdiction of the youth justice court that imposed the youth sentence, whether in the same or in another province, a youth justice court judge in the territorial division in which the youth sentence was imposed may, on the application of the Attorney General or on the application of the young person or the young person’s parent, with the consent of the Attorney General, transfer to a youth justice court in another territorial division the youth sentence and any portion of the record of the case that is appropriate. All subsequent proceedings relating to the case shall then be carried out and enforced by that court.

Interprovincial arrangements

67Subsection 58(1) of the Act is replaced by the following: 58 (1) When a youth sentence has been imposed under any of paragraphs 42(2) (c) and (k) to (s) in respect of a young person, the youth sentence in one province may be dealt with in any other province in accordance with any agreement that may have been made between those provinces.

Applicable provisions — detention and release

68The Act is amended by adding the following after section 108: 108.1 (1) If the case of a young person is referred to the youth justice court under section 108 for a review under section 103 or 109 and the young person is remanded to custody under section 102 or 106, sections 28 to 31 apply, with any necessary modifications, to an application for their release from custody until the completion of the review by the youth justice court. Reference (2) For the purposes of subsection (1), any reference in section 29 to a young person charged with a serious offence is to be read as a reference to a young person who has breached or is about to breach a condition referred to in section 102 or 106, as the case may be. Continuation of sentence (3) Despite the suspension of their conditional supervision and subject to section 107, the young person continues to serve their sentence until the review is completed by the youth justice court. Conditions continue to apply (4) During the suspension of their conditional supervision, any conditions imposed to which the young person is subject continues to apply, in addition to any conditions that may be imposed on them, in respect of a release order, until the completion of the review by the youth justice court. Notice to Attorney General (5) The provincial director shall, without delay, give notice to the Attorney General of an application in respect of the release from custody of a young person referred to in subsection (1).

Time not counted

69The Act is amended by adding the following after section 109: 109.1 The time spent by a young person who is unlawfully at large while subject to a youth sentence does not count as part of any term of a custody and supervision order.

Publication — urgent situation

70Section 110 of the Act is amended by adding the following after subsection (4): (4.1) A police officer may publish information that identifies a young person without a court order referred to in subsection (4) if the police officer has reasonable grounds to believe that (a) the young person has committed or is likely to commit an indictable offence; and (b) the urgency of the situation is such that the immediate publication is necessary for the following reasons: (i) the young person is an imminent danger to the public and the publication could aid in the prevention of serious bodily harm or death, (ii) the publication is necessary to assist in apprehending the young person, and (iii) the court order could not, with reasonable diligence, be obtained. Publication — more than 24 hours (4.2) The court order must be obtained if the publication is required for more than 24 hours after it has been made.

For greater certainty

71Section 115 of the Act is amended by adding the following after subsection (1.1): (1.2) For greater certainty, the police force may keep a record of an investigation in respect of an offence alleged to have been committed by a young person even if the investigation did not result in a charge or extrajudicial measures were not used to deal with that young person.

Records — certain investigations

72(1) Subsection 119(2) of the Act is amended by adding the following after paragraph (a): (a.1) if an extrajudicial measure, other than an extrajudicial sanction, is used to deal with the young person, the period ending two years from the day on which the decision to use the extrajudicial measure is made; (a.2) if the young person is the subject of an investigation referred to in subsection 115(1.2), two years from the day on which the young person ceases to be the subject of the investigation; (2) Section 119 of the Act is amended by adding the following after subsection (4): (4.1) Access to a record kept in respect of an investigation referred to in subsection 115(1.2) is to be given only to the following persons for the following purposes: (a) a peace officer or the Attorney General, in order to make a decision under this Act in respect of the young person to whom the investigation relates; and (b) a peace officer, for the purpose of investigating an offence. Evidence of investigation — inadmissible (4.2) Evidence that forms a part of a police investigation referred to in subsection 115(1.2) in respect of a young person is inadmissible for the purpose of proving prior offending behaviour in any proceedings before a court in respect of the young person.

Access to record by young person

73Section 124 of the Act is replaced by the following: 124 Despite any other provision of this Act , a young person to whom a record relates and their counsel may have access to the record at any time.

Agreements with provinces

74Section 156 of the Act is replaced by the following: 156 The Minister of Justice may enter into an agreement with the government of any province providing for payments by Canada to the province in respect of costs incurred by the province or a municipality in the province for care of and services provided to young persons dealt with under this Act.

Definition of Act

75(1) In this section and sections 76 to 78 , Act means the Youth Criminal Justice Act . Words and expressions (2) Unless the context requires otherwise, words and expressions used in sections 76 to 78 have the same meaning as in the Act.

Pending requests — records relating to extrajudicial measures

76(1) Paragraph 119(2)(a.1) of the Act, as enacted by subsection 72 (1), applies in respect of requests for access to records relating to extrajudicial measures, other than extrajudicial sanctions, that have been made before the day on which that subsection 72 (1) comes into force but for which access was not yet given before that day. For greater certainty — records relating to extrajudicial measures (2) For greater certainty, paragraph 119(2)(a.1) of the Act, as enacted by subsection 72 (1), applies in respect of records relating to extrajudicial measures, other than extrajudicial sanctions, that were created before the day on which that subsection 72 (1) comes into force and in respect of which a request for access is made on or after the day on which subsection 72 (1) comes into force.

Pending request — records relating to investigations

77(1) Paragraph 119(2)(a.2) and subsections 119(4.1) and (4.2) of the Act, as enacted by subsections 72 (1) and (2), apply in respect of requests for access to records relating to an investigation referred to in subsection 115(1.2) of the Act, as enacted by section 71 , that have been made before the day on which those subsections 72 (1) and (2) come into force but for which access was not yet given before that day. For greater certainty — records relating to investigations (2) For greater certainty, paragraph 119(2)(a.2) and subsections 119(4.1) and (4.2) of the Act, as enacted by subsections 72 (1) and (2), apply in respect of records relating to an investigation referred to in subsection 115(1.2) of the Act, as enacted by section 71 , that were created before the day on which those subsections 72 (1) and (2) come into force and in respect of which a request for access is made on or after the day on which subsections 72 (1) and (2) come into force.

Clarification — certain offences

78(1) For greater certainty, the provisions of the Act, as enacted by sections 59 , 63 to 67 and 69 , apply only with respect to an offence that is committed on or after the day on which those sections come into force. Clarification — application (2) For greater certainty, the provisions of the Act, as enacted by sections 60 to 62 , 68 , 70 , 71 , 73 and 74 , also apply with respect to any matter or proceeding that is ongoing on the day on which those sections come into force.

79Paragraph 203.3(a) of the National Defence Act is amended by adding the following after subparagraph (iv): (iv.1) the offence was committed against a person who, in the performance of their duties and functions, was providing services as a first responder, (iv.2) the offence was committed with the use of violence, threats or attempts of violence against another person and the offender has been convicted, within the previous five years, of one or more such offences, (iv.3) in the case of an offence under section 114 or 115, it was committed with intent to sell or barter the stolen property or to fraudulently return it to a retail merchant, (iv.4) in the case of an offence under any of sections 113 to 116, the offence interfered with the access to or functioning of an essential infrastructure , as defined in subsection 52.1(2) of the Criminal Code , or caused it to be unsafe or unfit for use,

Objectives — offence for the benefit of a criminal organization

80The Act is amended by adding the following after section 203.4: 203.41 When a court martial imposes a sentence for an offence that is committed for the benefit of, at the direction of, or in association with, a criminal organization, the court martial shall give primary consideration to the objectives of denunciation and deterrence of the conduct that forms the basis of the offence.

Offences of contempt

81The portion of section 302 of the Act before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following: 302 Every person is guilty of an offence and liable, on summary conviction, to a fine of not more than $5,000 or to imprisonment for less than two years , or to both, if the person

Clarification — certain offences

82For greater certainty, the provisions of the National Defence Act , as enacted by sections 79 to 81 , apply only with respect to an offence that is committed on or after the day on which those sections come into force.

Bill C-9

83(1) Subsections (2) to (6) apply if Bill C-9, introduced in the 1st session of the 45th Parliament and entitled the Combatting Hate Act (in this section referred to as the “other Act”), receives royal assent. (2) If subsection 9(1) of the other Act comes into force before subsection 23 (3) of this Act, then that subsection 23 (3) is amended by replacing the paragraphs 515(4.1)(h) to (k) that it enacts with the following: (h) an offence under subsection 423.3(1) (intimidation — building used for religious worship, etc.); (i) an offence relating to the contravention of any of sections 9 to 14 of the Cannabis Act ; (j) an offence relating to the contravention of any of sections 5 to 7 of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act ; (k) an offence that involves, or the subject-matter of which is, a firearm, a cross-bow, a prohibited weapon, a restricted weapon, a prohibited device, a firearm part, ammunition, prohibited ammunition or an explosive substance; (l) an offence under subsection 20(1), 20.1(1), 20.2(1), 20.3(1) or 20.4(1) of the Foreign Interference and Security of Information Act , or an offence under subsection 21(1) or 22(1) or section 23 of that Act that is committed in relation to an offence under subsection 20(1), 20.1(1), 20.2(1), 20.3(1) or 20.4(1) of that Act. (3) If subsection 23 (3) of this Act comes into force before subsection 9(1) of the other Act, then that subsection 9(1) is replaced by the following: 9 (1) Subsection 515(4.1) of the Act is amended by adding the following after paragraph (g): (g.1) an offence under subsection 423.3(1) (intimidation — building used for religious worship, etc.);

30th day after royal assent

84Sections 2 to 55 , 59 to 74 and 79 to 81 come into force on the 30th day after the day on which this Act receives royal assent.

Official record· parl.ca
Official drafter summary (parl.ca)

This enactment amends the Criminal Code to, among other things, (a) provide direction to peace officers, justices and judges when they apply the principle of restraint; (a.‍ 1 ) provide that a person must not be named as surety if the person was convicted of an indictable offence within ten years prior to a release order; (b) require a justice, before making a release order or a detention order in respect of an accused, to consider whether the accused is charged with an offence in the commission of which random and unprovoked violence was used or attempted; (c) require a justice to impose a condition prohibiting the possession of a firearm or other weapon, and to consider imposing other conditions, when making a release order in respect of an accused charged with the offence of extortion or any offence involving a criminal organization; (d) require a justice to consider imposing certain conditions when making a release order in respect of an accused charged with an offence of motor vehicle theft or with the offence of breaking and entering a dwelling-house; (e) create a reverse onus provision for any accused charged with the offence of motor vehicle theft involving violence, motor vehicle theft for a criminal organization, extortion involving violence, breaking and entering a dwelling-house, certain offences related to trafficking in persons or human smuggling, certain offences in the commission of which violence was allegedly used and that would constitute the accused’s third or subsequent such indictable offence or certain offences in which an accused is alleged to have choked, suffocated or strangled a complainant; (f) expand the reverse onus provision to any person charged with a serious offence involving violence and the use of a weapon who has been previously convicted, within 10 years, of a serious offence involving violence and the use of a weapon; (g) add the number or gravity of any outstanding charges against an accused as circumstances that a justice is to consider in assessing whether the detention of the accused is necessary to maintain confidence in the administration of justice; (h) expand the circumstances in which the release documents that an accused is subject to may be cancelled, provide for circumstances in which they can be cancelled and allow for the review, by the court of appeal, of decisions to cancel such documents; (i) create a reverse onus provision for any person who has been found guilty of certain offences if the prosecutor applies to vacate that person’s interim release order; (j) create new aggravating factors to address repeat violent offending, offences against first responders, retail theft and theft, mischief to property offences and assaults against public transit employees; (k) add new consecutive sentence provisions for repeat violent offences, motor vehicle theft offences and breaking and entering offences, and extortion and arson offences; (l) require courts to give primary consideration to denunciation and deterrence of repeat motor vehicle theft offences, repeat breaking and entering offences and organized crime offences; (m) restrict the possibility of imposing conditional sentence orders for sexual assault, and offences of a sexual nature or committed for a sexual purpose that involves a victim under 18 years of age; (n) restore the availability of driving prohibitions for the offences of manslaughter and criminal negligence causing bodily harm or death; and (o) improve the administration of justice as it relates to sentencing by increasing the penalty for contempt, enhancing the fine enforcement regime and expanding the availability of remote appearances in the mental disorder regime. It also amends the Department of Justice Act to provide that the Minister must prepare an annual report on the state of judicial interim release in Canada. It also amends the Youth Criminal Justice Act to, among other things, (a) clarify the definition of “violent offence” to mean, among other things, an offence in the commission of which a young person causes bodily harm or involving the use or trafficking of a firearm; (b) provide that the time a young person is unlawfully at large does not count towards time served for a youth custody and supervision order; (c) enable police officers to publish identifying information about a young person in urgent situations where there is an imminent danger to public safety; (d) clarify the process for the detention and release of young persons who are remanded for an alleged breach of a condition of their youth custody sentence while awaiting a review by the youth justice court; (e) set out a period of access for records of extrajudicial measures, other than extrajudicial sanctions, and clarify the rules for records of investigations kept by police that did not result in a charge or extrajudicial measures; and (f) make several technical sentencing amendments. It also amends the National Defence Act to, among other things, (a) improve the...

AI-assisted analysis
What MPs debatedCONTESTED536 speeches · 110 MPs · 128,990 words
Points of contention
  • Disagreement over the principle of restraint still being part of the bail system
  • Divisions on the adequacy of provisions in Bill C-14 versus Conservative proposals
  • Contention about the effectiveness of current bail laws in preventing repeat offenses
  • Concerns over the implications of reverse onus provisions for certain crimes

The debate showed divisions primarily along party lines, with Conservatives arguing for tougher measures while Liberals focused on balanced reforms.

Where MPs stood99 MPs · grouped by party · ranked by speaking volume
AI-assisted analysis
CPC52 spoke · 7 support · 35 oppose
Branden Leslie
Branden LeslieSUPPORTS10 speeches · 4,081 words
Argued for stronger bail reforms to prioritize public safety and protect victims.Public safety is not negotiable, period.
Larry Brock
Larry BrockOPPOSES14 speeches · 2,444 words
Criticized the government's failure to include substantial reforms in Bill C-14 related to repeat violent criminals and bail.I want to spend a bit of time talking about that... Why did the member's government see fit to claw back the eligibility of conditional sentences only where the Crown proceeds by indictment versus summary conviction, when the vast majority of sex assault prosecutions in this country are done by summary conviction?
Doug Shipley
Doug ShipleySUPPORTS7 speeches · 2,329 words
Argued that Bill C-14 is necessary to amend the Criminal Code to ensure public safety.Conservatives have been pushing for meaningful changes to fix our broken bail system for years, and I am pleased to see that steps are being taken to ensure safety in our communities...
BZ
Bob ZimmerOPPOSES10 speeches · 2,209 words
Argued that Bill C-14 is an admission of the failures from previous Liberal governments related to crime.We know it is not true and it is not going to happen. That is the premise of the question I asked in my speech today.
Tako Van Popta
Tako Van PoptaMIXED9 speeches · 2,140 words
Argued that while bail reform is needed for serious and repeat violent crimes, the bill retains the problematic principle of restraint introduced by previous legislation.Clearly there is a public perception that the administration of justice is being brought into disrepute by overly lax bail laws.
AL
Andrew LawtonMIXED6 speeches · 2,124 words
Argued that previous Liberal policies, particularly Bill C-75, contributed to the current crisis in bail and sentencing.I would love nothing other than for Bill C-14 to work and answer these key concerns, but it needs a lot more.
TJ
Tamara JansenOPPOSES8 speeches · 2,066 words
Argued that Bill C-14 does not address the urgent need for stronger consequences for violent offenders.Bill C-14 could have changed that. It could have drawn a line so that repeat violent offenders, sexual predators and men who harm women would face serious consequences, but it does not.
Rhonda Kirkland
Rhonda KirklandOPPOSES6 speeches · 2,027 words
Criticized the government's previous legislation, particularly Bill C-75, for creating a dangerous environment by promoting catch-and-release policies.Bill C-14 represents a rare Liberal admission that their justice reforms have failed.
Cathay Wagantall
Cathay WagantallMIXED6 speeches · 2,020 words
Argued that the bill has some positive elements but also fails to fully repeal problematic policies from previous legislation.While it is a step in the right direction of the Conservative approach to bail and sentencing, it does not repeal the principle of restraint or restore mandatory minimum sentences.
Dane Lloyd
Dane LloydMIXED6 speeches · 2,002 words
Argued that the bill addresses significant public safety issues stemming from the liberal approach to bail reform.After the government has finally been gotten through to, after years of failure, Bill C-14 starts to do the important work of scrapping failed Liberal bail policy.
Roman Baber
Roman BaberOPPOSES5 speeches · 1,979 words
Criticized the bill for not sufficiently addressing sentencing reform for young offenders.In its current form, it falls very short. The prevalence of young offenders in crime and gang violence is very troubling.
Rachael Thomas
Rachael ThomasOPPOSES6 speeches · 1,935 words
Argued that Bill C-14 does not go far enough to protect Canadians and communities.The government could have gone a lot further with Bill C-14. Unfortunately, it did not. As a result, we are going to continue to see crime skyrocket in this country and more people become victims.
FD
Fred DaviesSUPPORTS5 speeches · 1,839 words
Argued that the legislation is urgently needed to prevent repeat offenders from reoffending and protects community safety.The urgency is to ensure that repeat offenders do not get the opportunity to reoffend and that violent offenders, particularly with offences against children, do not see the light of day.
Arnold Viersen
Arnold ViersenOPPOSES5 speeches · 1,837 words
Argued that Bill C-14 is an admission of Liberal failure regarding bail laws.We think the Liberal bail system sucks and it should be repealed entirely.
JR
Jonathan RoweOPPOSES5 speeches · 1,823 words
Argued that rural communities are facing rampant crime, which has instilled fear among residents.The Conservatives want to repeal the principle of restraint and replace it with the principle of prioritizing community and public safety.
AK
Arpan KhannaSUPPORTS6 speeches · 1,818 words
Argued for repealing the principle of restraint to prioritize public safety.The piece of legislation the Liberals have brought forward... is trying to treat a gunshot wound with a band-aid.
Frank Caputo
Frank CaputoMIXED4 speeches · 1,794 words
Criticized the current bail review process as outdated and ineffective, suggesting it requires reform.I have no problem talking about the Conservative position on bail, which is generally that bail has become too loose, and I believe this bill could actually go much further.
Michael Guglielmin
Michael GuglielminSUPPORTS4 speeches · 1,761 words
Argued for stronger bail reform to prevent repeat violent offenders from being released.Conservatives would like nothing more than bail reform and sentence reform to be passed immediately.
Kurt Holman
Kurt HolmanMIXED4 speeches · 1,741 words
Argued that the justice system has failed to address rising crime and repeat offenders effectively.I am supporting Bill C-14 at second reading because people like me are asking for change right now, but supporting a bill to move forward does not mean pretending it fixes the core problems created by Bill C-75 and Bill C-5.
Todd Doherty
Todd DohertyMIXED5 speeches · 1,717 words
Argued for the urgent need to pass Bill S-233 to protect first responders from violence.Let us come together and pass Bill S-233.
CR
Colin ReynoldsMIXED5 speeches · 1,692 words
Argued that Bill C-14 is a step in the right direction but falls short on key reforms needed for public safety.Bill C-14 is a start, but it falls short of what this country needs for crime legislation.
FT
Fraser TolmieOPPOSES7 speeches · 1,688 words
Criticized the Liberal government's bail policies for contributing to a rise in violent crime and affecting public safety.The Liberal government's bail policies represent a clear and present danger to Canadian communities.
Ned Kuruc
Ned KurucOPPOSES4 speeches · 1,677 words
Argued that Bill C-14 does not go far enough in reforming the bail system, stating it is 'only going halfway.'Bill C-14 gives us half measures instead of complete solutions.
Kevin Waugh
Kevin WaughOPPOSES4 speeches · 1,645 words
Criticized the Liberals for their 'soft-on-crime' policies over the past decade that have led to increased crime rates.Crime is, in fact, out of control after a decade of Liberal soft-on-crime policies.
Kelly Block
Kelly BlockOPPOSES4 speeches · 1,643 words
Criticized the government's past bail reforms for increasing crime rates and jeopardizing public safety.For years now, Canadian families, communities and neighbourhoods have witnessed the catch-and-release crime wave that has swept across our nation.
Helena Konanz
Helena KonanzOPPOSES4 speeches · 1,600 words
Criticized the Liberal government's role in creating broken bail laws.This legislation would also not repeal the disastrous Bill C-5 or Bill C-75. It merely tinkers with them.
AG
Amanpreet GillOPPOSES7 speeches · 1,593 words
Criticized the Liberal government for its handling of crime and the bail system, arguing that it puts communities at risk.Canadians already know which side Conservatives are on. We are on the side of victims, of families and of safe and strong communities.
Jeff Kibble
Jeff KibbleOPPOSES6 speeches · 1,592 words
Criticized Bill C-14 for not adequately addressing violent repeat offenders.Bill C-14 fails to impose automatic detention for those already on bail... It falls short. The principle of restraint remains.
Amarjeet Gill
Amarjeet GillOPPOSES4 speeches · 1,583 words
Argued that Canadians are living in fear due to rising crime rates and ineffective Liberal bail laws.Canadians are tired of fear. They are tired of excuses. The Liberals have had [...]
SB
Steven BonkOPPOSES4 speeches · 1,514 words
Criticized Bill C-14 for not adequately addressing the issues of public safety and the handling of repeat violent offenders.The Conservative position is clear: Public safety comes first, justice means accountability and no violent repeat offender should walk free while innocent Canadians live in fear.
Anna Roberts
Anna RobertsOPPOSES10 speeches · 1,508 words
Criticized the current bail and sentencing system for prioritizing offenders' rights over community safety.The Liberals have spent years ignoring the mess they created with Bill C-75 and Bill C-5; they finally admitted that changes were needed, but their so-called reforms still leave dangerous repeat offenders in the systems that prioritize their release over public safety.
Ziad Aboultaif
Ziad AboultaifMIXED5 speeches · 1,504 words
Argued that Bill C-14 is a good start but a half measure that does not go far enough to address crime and safety.Bill C-14, which we are considering today, is a good start, but only a half measure.
CA
Chak AuSUPPORTS4 speeches · 1,453 words
Argued that current justice system policies, particularly the principle of restraint from Bill C-75, have led to increased crime and public safety risks.This bill contains good elements. Conservatives welcome those changes, but let us be honest: This is not a product of vision. It is a reaction, one that is long overdue.
Kerry Diotte
Kerry DiotteOPPOSES5 speeches · 1,426 words
Argued that Bill C-14 is a 'missed opportunity' to strengthen public safety and bail laws.Bill C-14 is another classic miss by the Liberals. Right now, we should be strengthening Canada's bail laws and protecting law-abiding citizens.
Kelly DeRidder
Kelly DeRidderOPPOSES5 speeches · 1,411 words
Argued that Bill C-14 fails to repeal the principle of restraint and only adds redundant measures.This is not reform but press release footnotes.
Marc Dalton
Marc DaltonOPPOSES5 speeches · 1,405 words
Criticized the government's approach as ineffective, claiming it does not adequately address rising crime rates.Bill C-14 is not a solution; it is a confession. It is the government's finally admitting that its so-called reforms are a disaster.
Sandra Cobena
Sandra CobenaOPPOSES5 speeches · 1,395 words
Argued that Bill C-14 fails to address the issues of public safety and crime effectively.Bill C-14 is not a solution, not a complete solution. It is a hollow echo of the Conservative proposal, a half measure drafted by a government that still refuses to acknowledge the crime crisis unfolding across the country.
EL
Eric LefebvreOPPOSES5 speeches · 1,393 words
Argued that Bill C-14 does not go far enough to protect communities.Unfortunately, Bill C‑14 does not go far enough to protect our communities.
DG
Dalwinder GillOPPOSES5 speeches · 1,292 words
Argued that previous Liberal bills have worsened crime, jeopardizing public safety.I do not believe that Bill C-14 as it currently stands would go far enough to address the issues of bail reform or to restore the trust in our justice system to keep the public safe.
Blaine Calkins
Blaine CalkinsOPPOSES2 speeches · 1,087 words
Criticized the Liberal government's handling of crime over the past decade, claiming it has led to increased lawlessness.The Liberal government has been one of the most divisive governments in Canada’s history over the last 10 years.
Warren Steinley
Warren SteinleyOPPOSES5 speeches · 557 words
Criticized the Liberal government for failing to pass a private member's bill aimed at protecting first responders.The only reason we need bail reform is that this member and the rest of the Liberals passed terrible legislation for the last 10 years, making our streets unsafe.
AR
Alex RuffSUPPORTS2 speeches · 288 words
Argued the importance of bail reform due to rising crime rates and issues with repeat violent offenders.Over the last decade, crime has gone through the roof across this country and in my own riding, especially among repeat violent offenders.
Leslyn Lewis
Leslyn LewisOPPOSES2 speeches · 230 words
Argued that erosion of mandatory minimums undermines public safety and confidence in the justice system.How does my friend think this bill is going to solve that problem, if at all, and restore the confidence of the public?
Ellis Ross
Ellis RossOPPOSES2 speeches · 194 words
Criticized the focus on the Charter of Rights over victims' rights.does the member still agree that the Charter of Rights rises above the three-year-old victim's rights or her well-being?
HG
Harb GillOPPOSES2 speeches · 157 words
Criticized the Liberal government for failing to propose effective solutions to rising extortion-related crimes.We have had 10 years during which extortion-related issues have gone up 330% in Canada and over 360% in all of Ontario.
Jagsharan Singh Mahal
Jagsharan Singh MahalOPPOSES3 speeches · 157 words
Argued that Bill C-14 contains loopholes that allow serious offenders to use house arrest.Bill C-14 still allows serious offenders, such as those who commit robbery, trafficking and firearms-related crimes, to use the option of house arrest.
Gérard Deltell
Gérard DeltellNEUTRAL1 speech · 154 words
Acknowledged the insightful intervention of a colleague.As far as a I know, and I am not a lawyer, but a journalist and I covered cases, reverse onus happens in very rare cases.
Michael Cooper
Michael CooperOPPOSES1 speech · 145 words
Criticized the bill for not including consecutive sentencing for multiple murderers.One thing that is completely missing from the bill is consecutive sentencing for murderers who have committed multiple murders.
Vincent Ho
Vincent HoOPPOSES1 speech · 130 words
Argued that the Liberals' bill does not adequately address the issues of repeat offenders.The Liberals are now tabling Bill C-14, which does not even meet us halfway.
Kelly McCauley
Kelly McCauleyOPPOSES1 speech · 128 words
Criticized the government's lack of a Conservative agenda on crime.Daily in the newspaper we see stories of victims of repeat violent offenders and victims of domestic violence from repeat violent offenders who are put in jail and are immediately brought back out.
Corey Tochor
Corey TochorOPPOSES1 speech · 118 words
Argued that Liberal bail policies have led to increased problems in communities since their implementation in 2015.What we really need is to go back to how it was before they were elected, before Bill C-5 and before Bill C-75.
Tamara Kronis
Tamara KronisOPPOSES1 speech · 114 words
Criticized the Liberal government's handling of bail legislation.Will the member admit that Liberal bail was a failure and apologize to those victims?
LPC31 spoke · 24 support · 3 oppose
Kevin Lamoureux
Kevin LamoureuxSUPPORTS66 speeches · 7,650 words
Argued that Bill C-14 aligns with the Prime Minister's election commitment to bail reform.Canadians want bail reform legislation. The Prime Minister, and every Liberal member of Parliament, want to see bail reform.
SF
Sean FraserSUPPORTS9 speeches · 4,323 words
Argued that the bill is crucial for reinforcing Canada's criminal laws and promoting public safety.This bill is about stronger laws and safer communities. It is about keeping people safe in the places they love and the places they live.
Lori Idlout
Lori IdloutOPPOSES15 speeches · 2,811 words
Criticized the bill for being a knee-jerk reaction that fails to address the real issues in the criminal justice system.The bill in its current form would narrow the principle of restraint, which would make it easier to keep people in detention.
JM
James MaloneySUPPORTS7 speeches · 2,071 words
Argued that Bill C-14 is the result of extensive consultation with stakeholders and has wide support within the law enforcement community.Bill C-14 creates a regime that is going to help our frontline police officers.
Patrick Weiler
Patrick WeilerSUPPORTS4 speeches · 1,960 words
Argued that Bill C-14 improves public safety by making bail stricter for repeat offenders.Bill C-14 would strengthen Canada's justice system by ensuring that repeat and violent offenders face greater accountability and would make it harder for individuals with serious or repeated charges to receive bail.
DO
Dominique O'RourkeSUPPORTS5 speeches · 1,707 words
Argued that the bail and sentencing reform act will strengthen measures against repeat and violent offenders.The bail and sentencing reform act would introduce over 80 clauses of targeted reforms to strengthen both our bail and our sentencing regimes to respond to this reality.
Patricia Lattanzio
Patricia LattanzioSUPPORTS6 speeches · 1,575 words
Argued that Bill C-14 represents significant modernization of Canada's bail and sentencing laws to enhance public safety.This bill is about one thing above all else: keeping Canadians safe in their homes, safe on their streets and safe in their communities.
JN
Juanita NathanSUPPORTS4 speeches · 1,500 words
Argued that Bill C-14 includes necessary amendments to the Youth Criminal Justice Act to improve its effectiveness.I am pleased to rise today to speak in support of Bill C-14.
Ron McKinnon
Ron McKinnonSUPPORTS5 speeches · 1,486 words
Argued that Bill C-14 modernizes Canada's criminal justice system and strengthens bail and sentencing laws.Bill C-14 makes it clear that attacks on infrastructure are not minor property crimes; they are serious threats to public safety.
Sukh Dhaliwal
Sukh DhaliwalSUPPORTS6 speeches · 1,439 words
Argued that Bill C-14 addresses community safety by making bail harder for repeat and violent offenders.Bill C-14 ... delivers over 80 targeted amendments to the Criminal Code, the Youth Criminal Justice Act and the National Defence Act, making bail harder to get for repeat and violent offenders and ensuring that sentences are tougher and more consistent with public expectations.
MM
Michael MaOPPOSES6 speeches · 1,398 words
Criticized the Liberal government for rushing through Bill C-14 without addressing fundamental issues in previous bills.Bill C-14 represents a patchwork of compromises... What a mess.
Iqwinder Gaheer
Iqwinder GaheerSUPPORTS5 speeches · 1,352 words
Argued that Bill C-14 strengthens public safety while ensuring fairness in the justice system.I urge all members of the House to support the legislation, stand for safer communities and stand for a justice system worthy of the people we serve.
RS
Ruby SahotaSUPPORTS11 speeches · 1,254 words
Argued that Bill C-14 does not erode mandatory minimums and is important for public safety.Canadians deserve for us to care about their safety and to put victims first. The bill does that. It keeps repeat violent offenders off our streets.
GS
Gurbux SainiSUPPORTS6 speeches · 1,202 words
Argued that the bill strengthens bail and sentencing laws for serious offenders.Bill C-14 represents necessary and responsible criminal law reform. It demonstrates that Parliament can respond thoughtfully to emerging challenges in the justice system by refining the law to reflect both fairness and accountability.
Bienvenu-Olivier Ntumba
Bienvenu-Olivier NtumbaSUPPORTS5 speeches · 1,076 words
Argued that the bill enhances public safety by ensuring a fair and effective bail system.Bill C‑14 is a decisive step toward a more consistent, more robust and more humane justice system.
Ryan Turnbull
Ryan TurnbullSUPPORTS4 speeches · 409 words
Argued that the bill specifically addresses bail and sentencing reforms for repeat violent offenders to enhance public safety.The reverse onus on serious violent offences that this bill includes is really significant.
Will Greaves
Will GreavesSUPPORTS3 speeches · 386 words
Argued that crime is decreasing nationally and in Saskatchewan, countering Conservative claims.At the end of the day, Conservative members are asking whether Canadians have confidence in the government. The real question is whether Conservatives are prepared to accept the confidence Canadians have expressed in the government...
Randeep Sarai
Randeep SaraiSUPPORTS3 speeches · 378 words
Argued that Bill C-14 is charter-compliant and victim-focused, supporting its implementation.Bill C-14 was done with the consultation of municipal police forces, the provinces and territories, solicitors general, attorneys general and members of the public...that is why we are supporting it.
MG
Mark GerretsenSUPPORTS4 speeches · 338 words
Argued for allowing the bill to go to committee to address concerns raised by the opposition.Why will Conservatives not let this bill pass so it can go to committee, where their concerns can be raised?
Marilyn Gladu
Marilyn GladuOPPOSES4 speeches · 308 words
Argued that previous Liberal bills have not effectively addressed criminal justice issues.The real problem with Bill C-14 is that it does not remove the principle of the least restrictive punishment at the earliest possible opportunity.
AK
Arielle KayabagaSUPPORTS2 speeches · 216 words
Argued that police associations emphasize the importance of quickly passing the bill to enhance public safety.The Bail and Sentencing Reform Act represents a vital and long-overdue advancement. This is an essential step in creating a safer London that our members serve.
KT
Kristina Tesser DerksenSUPPORTS2 speeches · 203 words
Highlighted the impact of reverse onus provisions and asked how they would improve public safety.Our new bail and sentencing reform legislation would allow courts to use discretion in individual cases to ensure that criminals are properly punished without the risk of violating the charter.
AS
Abdelhaq SariNEUTRAL2 speeches · 187 words
Asked for clarification on how the bill improves collaboration with local authorities.Since my colleague had limited speaking time, could he now explain how this bill could make it easier to collaborate with municipal and regional authorities and reduce crime committed by potentially very dangerous individuals on the streets?
Doug Eyolfson
Doug EyolfsonMIXED2 speeches · 185 words
Highlighted concerns about the underfunding of Crown attorneys in Manitoba, affecting timely bail hearings.Many people are out on bail, not because of insufficient provisions in the law but because they do not have enough Crown attorneys to give them timely bail hearings.
AI
Angelo IaconoSUPPORTS2 speeches · 175 words
Argued that the legislation clarifies that restraint does not mean 'automatic release'.Canadians welcome legislation that would ensure that perpetrators of sexual assault would no longer be eligible for house arrest.
MC
Michael CoteauSUPPORTS2 speeches · 162 words
Argued that the bill is a necessary reform for the current moment.What Conservatives are proposing does not work. That is why we have come up with a piece of legislation that is right for this moment.
Nathaniel Erskine-Smith
Nathaniel Erskine-SmithMIXED1 speech · 147 words
Recognized the importance of public safety but acknowledged the complexities surrounding pretrial detention.Public safety can be complex, especially around pretrial detention.
Lisa Hepfner
Lisa HepfnerMIXED1 speech · 121 words
Acknowledged the eloquence and legal background of a colleague's speech, indicating respect for well-founded arguments.Does the member believe that Canadians want us to uphold the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, or should we just use the notwithstanding clause every time there is a political uproar about something?
SA
Sima AcanSUPPORTS1 speech · 118 words
Argued that the bill has widespread support from provinces, territories, municipalities, and various police associations.The bill has much support. There is tremendous support from the provinces, the territories and lots of municipalities...
GD
Guillaume Deschênes-ThériaultSUPPORTS1 speech · 114 words
Argued that strong protections are essential for community safety.Our new Liberal government is taking a rigorous approach to fighting crime, as evidenced by our many bills... and our Bill C-14.
JR
Jacques RamsaySUPPORTS1 speech · 102 words
Argued that Bill C-14 protects Canadian communities and victims.I would argue that it fulfills these three objectives.
BQ15 spoke · 4 support · 6 oppose
Christine Normandin
Christine NormandinMIXED9 speeches · 3,890 words
Criticized the rushed process of discussing the bill, stating it cut corners for political purposes.That being said, Bill C-14 is not all bad. We are voting in favour of it.
Rhéal Éloi Fortin
Rhéal Éloi FortinMIXED6 speeches · 3,664 words
Argued that the bill does not sufficiently clarify the relationship between bail and public safety issues.However, my remarks relate to the fact that both we and the premiers lack sufficient data on this specific issue.
Andréanne Larouche
Andréanne LaroucheMIXED9 speeches · 2,502 words
Expressed concerns about the balance between judicial independence and the need for stricter bail conditions.The Bloc Québécois supports the bill, but I would say we have concerns.
Alexis Deschênes
Alexis DeschênesOPPOSES8 speeches · 2,160 words
Argued that the presumption of innocence is a cornerstone of the criminal justice system that must not be undermined.The figures show that, in Canada, 71% of inmates in provincial or territorial prisons are currently awaiting trial. These are people who were denied bail.
MC
Martin ChampouxSUPPORTS5 speeches · 944 words
Supported Bill C-14 but highlighted the need for amendments and improvements.The Bloc Québécois supports Bill C-14. However, we still have some concerns about the text of the bill, including the discretion that it gives to judges to reverse the burden of proof for certain crimes.
MS
Mario SimardOPPOSES5 speeches · 592 words
Criticized the Conservatives for trying to create public discontent around the bill.We need to be careful with ideology. If we engage in alarmist rhetoric, we could needlessly elicit fear in people and end up with laws ill-suited to the public's needs.
Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe
Alexis Brunelle-DuceppeSUPPORTS4 speeches · 477 words
Expressed support for Bill C-14 but emphasized the need to work on it in committee.We are in favour of Bill C‑14, but we want to work on it in committee. We have concerns.
Mario Beaulieu
Mario BeaulieuMIXED8 speeches · 460 words
Argued that the Jordan decision should not allow the release of serious offenders due to trial delays.The Bloc Québécois is questioning this measure because the Supreme Court has never ruled that remand is prohibited.
Maxime Blanchette-Joncas
Maxime Blanchette-JoncasOPPOSES2 speeches · 250 words
Criticized the Conservatives for promoting ineffective policies like the three strikes law that do not reduce crime.Why are the Conservatives so focused on a policy that does not work and does not reduce crime, instead of adopting an approach based on evidence, rigour, accountability and, above all, prevention?
Claude DeBellefeuille
Claude DeBellefeuilleOPPOSES2 speeches · 240 words
Argued that improving legislation is crucial and criticized the government's portrayal of debate as filibustering.It seems to me that our job is to improve and enhance legislation.
PB
Patrick BoninOPPOSES3 speeches · 222 words
Argued that mandatory minimum sentences do not deter crime and cause injustices in sentencing.The Bloc Québécois is generally against mandatory minimum sentences because they have not been proven to deter criminals from committing crime.
Luc Thériault
Luc ThériaultMIXED2 speeches · 187 words
Criticized the lack of federal funding for provinces related to administrative costs.However, it will result in administrative costs for provinces, which are already struggling.
Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay
Simon-Pierre Savard-TremblaySUPPORTS2 speeches · 173 words
Indicated agreement with Bill C-14, noting the need for further examination in committee.We agree with Bill C-14. Obviously, like everything else, we will study it more thoroughly in committee.
Marie-Hélène Gaudreau
Marie-Hélène GaudreauSUPPORTS2 speeches · 168 words
Argued that the bill includes worthwhile points for public safety.Bill C-14 covers six major points that the Bloc Québécois thinks are very worthwhile.
SL
Sébastien LemireOPPOSES1 speech · 124 words
Criticized the government's response time on the bill regarding U.S. pressure.Should we bend even further to the will of the United States? That is exactly what the Liberals told us that they would do.
Legislative stages
  1. First reading (House of Commons)
    Oct 23, 2025
  2. Second reading (House of Commons)
    Nov 18, 2025
  3. Third reading (House of Commons)
    Feb 13, 2026
  4. First reading (Senate)
    Feb 23, 2026
  5. Second reading (Senate)
    Mar 12, 2026
  6. Third reading (Senate)
    May 28, 2026
  7. Royal Assent
    Jun 15, 2026