“I want to look like I care about victims. My bill spends more money. We should spend money on my separate system.”
What they said. What they meant.
Plain-language translations from the House of Commons.
Recent debates
8 latest topics
Spring Economic Update 2026 Implementation Act
57 statements
Spring Economic Update 2026 Implementation Act
19 statements
Arab Heritage Month Act
5 statements
The Economy
15 statements
Government Priorities
2 statements
Government Priorities
2 statements
Housing
12 statements
The Environment
2 statements
Government Orders
Government Orders
A long bill to modernize Canada's military justice system, mostly by changing investigation and trial processes for sexual offenses. Members split their time between discussing the bill's actual changes and trading partisan shots at each other.
“I'm saying nice things about the military to soften you up. This bill gives military more legal privileges. It moves some crimes to a separate justice system. That system can be more independent. It gives victims some help. We're trying to recruit more soldiers. We're making many rules and categories and road maps. It's a lot of work. This bill is a step forward. It's progress. It's very important. We owe this to Canadians. Let's pass this bill.”
“I'm filling time by reading a long quote from a report. I want the other party to look bad for supporting this in the past.”
“I want you to know that I care about the troops. Someone talked to a lot of them. They said our plan is good.”
“I want to look concerned. I want you to attack Conservatives for not agreeing with that report. I want to force Conservatives to explain themselves.”
“I'm just reading from a report. That makes me look good. It says our military has been bad to minority groups in the past. That's sad. Things are better now but problems aren't all fixed yet. Women and minorities had it rough. The report says so.”
“Do you think we should ignore this judge's advice?”
“I want the military justice system to handle all cases. Don't change that.”
“I'm filling time by attacking other parties' motives. Look at me defending the military against those bad people over there!”
“I'm not going to apologize for what I believe. We must do what a report said. The other parties are wrong to question it. We should pass this bill because an expert wrote this report. I think our party is doing a good job. Our military is strong.”
“I want everyone to agree with this judge. I don't like your point.”
“You don't have to attend to know what happened. Here's a quote from someone agreeing with a point. Letting victims choose jurisdiction could put them in a bad spot if it goes wrong.”
“I was interrupted. I want to finish my quote. Let me keep talking.”
“I don't want to finish my quote. You mentioned committee. I won't address that. I'll just talk past my time.”
“I want military victims to trust someone new.”
“I want everyone in this room to cheer for my side.”
“You Conservatives didn't think this through. I want a civilian system, not a choice. Justice Arbour said so. Are you calling her wrong?”
“I am supporting this bill because it will modernize the military justice system and improve the culture of the Canadian Armed Forces. This is important for the safety and well-being of our military members. The bill addresses key recommendations from independent reviews. We must continue to strengthen policies and programs to protect our military and civilian members who work hard to keep us safe.”
“That news was bad. I want to pass this bill to fix those problems.”
“I want to praise the government because it followed some advice. But don't let people choose something else. Experts say that's a false choice. I won't say why or give details. But I want to throw this talking point at you.”