TranslatePolitics.ca

Recent debates

8 latest topics

06-18 Spring Economic Update 2026 Implementation Act 57 statements 06-18 Spring Economic Update 2026 Implementation Act 19 statements 06-18 Arab Heritage Month Act 5 statements 06-18 The Economy 15 statements 06-18 Government Priorities 2 statements 06-18 Government Priorities 2 statements 06-18 Housing 12 statements 06-18 The Environment 2 statements

Government Orders

Military Justice System Modernization Act

2026-05-08 Sitting 120 Showing 21–28 of 28

A bill to reform the military justice system, including removing military jurisdiction over sexual assault cases in Canada. In debate, the Bloc pushed for more victim choice in the system, while the Liberals insisted their approach was best. Conservatives asked for amendments to be reconsidered. Much discussion focused on parliamentary procedure, majority powers, and collaboration between parties.

Official Hansard ↗

John-Paul Danko

Liberal 1:05 p.m.

“Look at all the young people serving our country! Our government must do more to protect them. Don't you agree?”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, the member spoke about his time serving in Canada's Armed Forces. Just recently, I had the opportunity to spend some time at the HMCS Star in Hamilton speaking with recruits, reservists, veterans and cadets, the young men and women in Canada's military who are so proud of their country and their service. I spoke with the commander who talked about the increase in recruiting and interest in serving in Canada's military and the new opportunities for an advance presence in Hamilton. I wonder if the member could comment on our role, as the federal government, in making sure that everyone who is serving Canada in our military, in the Armed Forces, is protected and safe in their service.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Hon. Kevin Lamoureux

Liberal 1:05 p.m.

“We're doing our part. The government is responsible and we're supporting our forces. I served in the Armed Forces and it was a privilege. Everyone benefits from this program.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I truly appreciate the question because I think it goes two ways. The government has a responsibility. We are living up to that responsibility. Again, I will reinforce that, after this bill passes, the 48 recommendations will in fact be put in place. They are respectful, inclusive and absolutely critical. We need to continue to support our forces in the manner in which we have over the last 12 months. Second to no other Prime Minister in generations, we have a solid commitment. I also want to make reference to this. The member mentioned my time in the Armed Forces. I had the honour to serve for just over three years, which was an absolute privilege. It is the skill sets that are gained by members of the forces that turn out to be such a wonderful asset in the future. Whether one is in the forces for three years or 30 years, there is a great deal of benefit had by all.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Alex Ruff

Conservative 1:05 p.m.

“I served in the military for a long time. You said our military police can handle crimes overseas, but that's not what the bill does. The military justice system will still handle these cases. Do you really trust the military justice system to do the job?”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, as the member knows, I spent 25 and a half years in uniform serving our great nation. I want to get back to the answer to my previous question. The member stated that if one of the members of the CAF commits a heinous crime, a Criminal Code sexual offence, overseas, he has complete faith in our military police to be able to collect the data, but then it needs to be transferred to the civilian courts. Unfortunately, that is not what is going to happen when Bill C-11 passes. The same thing that occurs right now will happen when that bill passes. If the military police can find a police of jurisdiction, if there is some way to make that connection and they are willing to take that charge on, then, yes, but in the end it is going to be the military justice system that is going to do justice for these victims. Does the member have faith that our military justice system can do the job and provide justice for the victims?

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Hon. Kevin Lamoureux

Liberal 1:05 p.m.

“That's not what the bill says. The member should read the Arbour report's recommendation 5. Our military police are good at collecting and protecting evidence overseas. Some places don't have the same legal standards as Canada. We need to make sure our military justice system can handle this.”

Yves Perron

Bloc Québécois 1:05 p.m.

“I'm going to complain until I get the answer I want. I want to look tough on this issue. I'm trying to make the government look bad.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I will repeat my question, since I still have not received an answer. The parliamentary secretary and I know each other quite well. We all know that he has a way with words, but I want to ask him to refrain from skirting around the issue by talking about other things, like the recommendations from Justice Arbour or anyone else. We developed an amendment in committee that would allow a victim—male or female, since either is possible—who is in fact the most important person in these circumstances, to choose whether their sexual assault case would be handled by the civilian courts or a military court. That can be done. We do not own the truth, contrary to what the government might think. I would like to get an objective and sincere answer. Why was this amendment removed? I understand that the Liberals have a majority and that they can decide, but it was a good amendment. Why did they remove it? I would like to hear a rational explanation.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Hon. Kevin Lamoureux

Liberal 1:10 p.m.

“I want to look like I am answering your question but not really. I'll just talk about a report I like and ignore what you asked.”

Alex Ruff

Conservative 1:10 p.m.

“I'm disappointed the government removed the amendments we added in committee. The bill should make sure victims get justice. I hope the Senate puts the sunset clause and data collection back in. If we don't get this right, we'll be back here apologizing to victims in a few years.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, because of the programming motion and the time allocation on this, I am going to be the last individual to speak in this chamber, unless the bill comes back, and there is a very high probability that it may come back, based on the Minister of National Defence's indication earlier in this chamber. When I spoke to the bill earlier this week, I highlighted the importance that we get it right. This is about the victims. This is about our military justice system. This is about retaining the credibility of our military police and our military prosecutors, but in the end, it is all about a victim-centred, trauma-informed decision within our Canadian Armed Forces. I have highlighted before that ultimately the decision was made in late 2021 by the director of military prosecutions, in light of the report that came out by Justice Arbour, to try to transfer all Criminal Code sexual offences to the civilian authorities. In the last five years, we have learned that the civilian police of jurisdiction do not have the resources or the capacity to deal with all these Criminal Code sexual offences. Part of the reason is that sometimes the cases are historical in nature and the courts do not view that they are in the best interest of public safety here in Canada. However, they are definitely in the best interest of justice within the Canadian Armed Forces, discipline and the necessary requirements that we need of our Canadian Armed Forces members. If all the amendments that were done, in some cases with all-party consensus, get removed and Bill C-11 passes in its current form, the challenge we are going to have is that the victims are not going to get justice. There are two things that I think we are going to see happen at the Senate. Based on the minister's own commentary here in the chamber, he is open to the sunset clause amendment that did pass at committee, which the government has since removed, to be put back into the bill. The other thing I think needs to be included in the bill is some sort of data collection provision. The biggest challenges we hear all the time, especially as these cases get transferred to civilian authorities, are how many they actually take, how many result in a charge being laid and how many end up with something occurring. These are all very important things that I think we need to do, and I encourage those members in the other place to take this into consideration as the bill goes forward. However, the ultimate disappointment I have with the government's decision not to respect the victims and the decisions made at committee is that we are not going to get this right. As I said before, I predict that those of us who will have the privilege of still being in this chamber in a few years will be dealing with the next iteration of this bill and, unfortunately, apologizing to the victims who are not going to get the justice they deserve.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Hon. Kevin Lamoureux

Liberal 1:10 p.m.

“I want to skip to the next item without waiting.”

What they said. What they meant.

Recent debates