Discussion · Government Orders
Tim Watchorn Liberal
“I want this bill passed without the opposition's changes. The bill sends all sexual assault cases in the military to civilian police and courts, as an independent expert recommended. The opposition's changes make the system confusing and hurt victims.”
“Mr. Speaker, it is always a pleasure for me to rise in the House on behalf of the people of Pays‑d’en‑Haut. Today, in the House, we are debating a bill that is very important for the military community and the Canadian Armed Forces. I would like to begin by thanking Canadian Armed Forces members, veterans and their families for their service to our country. This bill seeks to modernize the military justice system and originally included recommendations from the reports of former Supreme Court of Canada justices Louise Arbour and Morris J. Fish. These changes are essential to the long-term success of the Canadian Armed Forces and the entire defence team as they continue their important mission of defending Canada and Canadians. The bill responds to recommendation 5 from former Supreme Court Justice Arbour’s report and the eight recommendations from former Supreme Court Justice Fish’s report. However, the amendments made by the committee and proposed by opposition MPs run counter to these recommendations. I believe that all my colleagues in the House will agree with me on the following point: Bringing about lasting and meaningful cultural change within the Canadian Armed Forces must be one of our top priorities. That is why I believe it is crucial to hold this debate here, so that we can discuss the importance of upholding the recommendations of former Supreme Court Justice Louise Arbour. Today I will address the importance of recommendation 5. In 2022, Ms. Arbour submitted her final report on sexual misconduct in the Canadian Armed Forces to the Minister of National Defence. This report, entitled “Report of the Independent External Comprehensive Review of the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces”, contains 48 recommendations that focused on reforming the “institutional shortcomings” and “structural impediments” that have allowed the problem to persist. Justice Arbour’s recommendation 5 is that civilian authorities should have exclusive jurisdiction over Criminal Code sexual offences alleged against members of the Canadian Armed Forces. I quote: Criminal Code sexual offences should be removed from the jurisdiction of the [Canadian Armed Forces]. They should be prosecuted exclusively in civilian criminal courts in all cases. Where the offence takes place in Canada, it should be investigated by civilian police forces at the earliest opportunity. Where the offence takes place outside of Canada, the [military police] may act in the first instance to safeguard evidence and commence an investigation, but should liaise with civilian law enforcement at the earliest possible opportunity. She also states the following in her report: ...I do not envisage a type of permanent transfer process by which a victim would report a crime to the [military police], who would then transfer the case to a civilian police service. The experience of the interim recommendation has shown that to be unworkable. I expect victims to be told to contact civilian authorities directly, and such contact to be facilitated by the [military police] and the [Canadian Armed Forces] so far as possible. However, the amendments proposed by the opposition parties run directly counter to this recommendation. This will make it even more difficult for victims to navigate the justice system due to the complexity of the new procedures included in the bill as amended by the opposition parties. The lack of clarity and transparency will have a negative impact on the military justice system and on victims and survivors. Since December 2021, all new Criminal Code sexual offence charges have been laid in the civilian justice system. None of these offences are tried in the military justice system, and this arrangement is working. Justice Arbour also relied on the results of the Declaration of Victims Rights consultation in issuing recommendation 5. In her report, she notes: Common themes in the response to the consultation included “fear of reprisal and retaliation, lack of support, shame and embarrassment, issues with the system, the accused being protected, and the individual responsible for handling complaints being the perpetrator.” There was also a widely held perception, both among those who identified as victims of a service offence and those who did not, that the military justice system fails to treat victims with dignity and respect.... This lack of trust and fear of reprisals were also raised by the vast majority of witnesses during the committee’s consideration of Bill C-11. Here is an example of testimony received by the committee. On November 20, 2025, Paula MacDonald made the following statement during her testimony before the Standing Committee on National Defence: When I went to the civilian police, I was told more than once to go back to the military system that failed me. At the same time, my leaders reframed my complaints. Instead of naming sexual harassment and abuse of power that led to sexual assault, they called me emotional, hypersensitive and a mental health problem. She continued: In my case, the Canadian Armed Forces didn’t simply mishandle a file; it used the machinery of the military justice and grievance system to protect its membership, who violated the National Defence Act and silenced me. The misuse of state power that the charter is meant to guard against is what they did. It is exactly why the reforms like Bill C‑11 and a real shift to independent civilian jurisdiction over sexual offences is so urgently needed to maintain the rule of law within the Canadian Armed Forces. She also said the following: If a Canadian solution is to move it to the civilian system— and it seems that this is our Canadian solution—where our three Supreme Court justices, who are experts in the delivery of justice, say it should be, then this is what we need to do. I think it is pretty clear that there is a lack of trust in the military justice system when it comes to sexual offences. That is why the defence team implemented most of Justice Arbour’s recommendations, and we need to do the same for recommendation 5. This bill should establish a clear framework for investigating and acting on allegations of sexual misconduct in order to foster an environment of accountability and justice. That would not happen if we adopted the amendments put forward by the opposition parties to remove Justice Arbour’s recommendation 5 from Bill C‑11. We are encouraged by the positive changes in the culture of the defence team in recent years. Bill C‑11 and the changes it will make to the National Defence Act are a crucial step in strengthening that trust and ensuring that this change is permanent. Canadians who serve our country risk everything for us. In return, we owe them our full and unconditional support.”
-
A repeated line
“Should liaise with civilian law enforcement at the earliest possible opportunity?”
Said 4 times by 3 members since April 23.
Every time it was said
Mr. Speaker, it is always a pleasure for me to rise in the House on behalf of the people of Pays‑d’en‑Haut. Today, in the House, we are debating a bill that is very important for the military community and the Canadian Armed Forces. I would like to begin by thanking Canadian Armed Forces members, veterans and their families for their service to our country. This bill seeks to modernize the military justice system and originally included recommendations from the reports of former Supreme Court of Canada justices Louise Arbour and Morris J. Fish. These changes are essential to the long-term success of the Canadian Armed Forces and the entire defence team as they continue their important mission of defending Canada and Canadians. The bill responds to recommendation 5 from former Supreme Court Justice Arbour’s report and the eight recommendations from former Supreme Court Justice Fish’s report. However, the amendments made by the committee and proposed by opposition MPs run counter to these recommendations. I believe that all my colleagues in the House will agree with me on the following point: Bringing about lasting and meaningful cultural change within the Canadian Armed Forces must be one of our top priorities. That is why I believe it is crucial to hold this debate here, so that we can discuss the importance of upholding the recommendations of former Supreme Court Justice Louise Arbour. Today I will address the importance of recommendation 5. In 2022, Ms. Arbour submitted her final report on sexual misconduct in the Canadian Armed Forces to the Minister of National Defence. This report, entitled “Report of the Independent External Comprehensive Review of the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces”, contains 48 recommendations that focused on reforming the “institutional shortcomings” and “structural impediments” that have allowed the problem to persist. Justice Arbour’s recommendation 5 is that civilian authorities should have exclusive jurisdiction over Criminal Code sexual offences alleged against members of the Canadian Armed Forces. I quote: Criminal Code sexual offences should be removed from the jurisdiction of the [Canadian Armed Forces]. They should be prosecuted exclusively in civilian criminal courts in all cases. Where the offence takes place in Canada, it should be investigated by civilian police forces at the earliest opportunity. Where the offence takes place outside of Canada, the [military police] may act in the first instance to safeguard evidence and commence an investigation, but should liaise with civilian law enforcement at the earliest possible opportunity. She also states the following in her report: ...I do not envisage a type of permanent transfer process by which a victim would report a crime to the [military police], who would then transfer the case to a civilian police service. The experience of the interim recommendation has shown that to be unworkable. I expect victims to be told to contact civilian authorities directly, and such contact to be facilitated by the [military police] and the [Canadian Armed Forces] so far as possible. However, the amendments proposed by the opposition parties run directly counter to this recommendation. This will make it even more difficult for victims to navigate the justice system due to the complexity of the new procedures included in the bill as amended by the opposition parties. The lack of clarity and transparency will have a negative impact on the military justice system and on victims and survivors. Since December 2021, all new Criminal Code sexual offence charges have been laid in the civilian justice system. None of these offences are tried in the military justice system, and this arrangement is working. Justice Arbour also relied on the results of the Declaration of Victims Rights consultation in issuing recommendation 5. In her report, she notes: Common themes in the response to the consultation included “fear of reprisal and retaliation, lack of support, shame and embarrassment, issues with the system, the accused being protected, and the individual responsible for handling complaints being the perpetrator.” There was also a widely held perception, both among those who identified as victims of a service offence and those who did not, that the military justice system fails to treat victims with dignity and respect.... This lack of trust and fear of reprisals were also raised by the vast majority of witnesses during the committee’s consideration of Bill C-11. Here is an example of testimony received by the committee. On November 20, 2025, Paula MacDonald made the following statement during her testimony before the Standing Committee on National Defence: When I went to the civilian police, I was told more than once to go back to the military system that failed me. At the same time, my leaders reframed my complaints. Instead of naming sexual harassment and abuse of power that led to sexual assault, they called me emotional, hypersensitive and a mental health problem. She continued: In my case, the Canadian Armed Forces didn’t simply mishandle a file; it used the machinery of the military justice and grievance system to protect its membership, who violated the National Defence Act and silenced me. The misuse of state power that the charter is meant to guard against is what they did. It is exactly why the reforms like Bill C‑11 and a real shift to independent civilian jurisdiction over sexual offences is so urgently needed to maintain the rule of law within the Canadian Armed Forces. She also said the following: If a Canadian solution is to move it to the civilian system— and it seems that this is our Canadian solution—where our three Supreme Court justices, who are experts in the delivery of justice, say it should be, then this is what we need to do. I think it is pretty clear that there is a lack of trust in the military justice system when it comes to sexual offences. That is why the defence team implemented most of Justice Arbour’s recommendations, and we need to do the same for recommendation 5. This bill should establish a clear framework for investigating and acting on allegations of sexual misconduct in order to foster an environment of accountability and justice. That would not happen if we adopted the amendments put forward by the opposition parties to remove Justice Arbour’s recommendation 5 from Bill C‑11. We are encouraged by the positive changes in the culture of the defence team in recent years. Bill C‑11 and the changes it will make to the National Defence Act are a crucial step in strengthening that trust and ensuring that this change is permanent. Canadians who serve our country risk everything for us. In return, we owe them our full and unconditional support.