Protecting Victims Act

Bill C-16, Protecting Victims Act · Third reading · now law Where it stands

What the law does

The law amends the Criminal Code to create a new offence for coercive or controlling conduct toward an intimate partner. It classifies intimate partner murders linked to controlling conduct or sexual violence as first-degree murder, and expands the offence of sharing intimate images without consent to cover realistic depictions. The law also gives victims automatic access to information about their cases, bars people suspected of domestic violence or stalking from holding firearms licences, and makes other changes across the justice system.

Official text (opens in a new tab)

49 statements

Stephanie McLean, Secretary of State (Seniors)

Liberal
“The courts often strike down mandatory minimum sentences as unconstitutional. The Conservatives will not support this bill without them. I am asking why they want rules that will only weaken this law and waste court time.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, we know that 76% of appellate-level challenges to Harper-era mandatory minimum sentences were successful. We also know that the Conservatives are saying that they will not support this bill without the addition of mandatory minimum sentences, but more than 217 challenges to the constitutionality of these since 2021 have been made. When the courts frequently strike down mandatory minimum sentences, why do members think the Conservatives want the government to include clauses that would weaken the legislation, increase the likelihood of it being struck down, and take up precious court time and costs on unconstitutional clauses? What do you think their real reason is for—

Emma Harrison, Peterborough

Liberal
“I want the Conservatives to vote for this bill. It will protect victims of domestic violence and make coercive control a crime.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 45 of 100

    None of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, my colleague did a beautiful job of painting the picture of what is really going on here. I would like to take a moment to speak as a survivor of domestic violence and how critically important this legislation is. It is hard to truly put into words how challenging it is to navigate a justice system after having been a victim of crime. This bill would address that. It would address coercive control, which is incredibly important. It is very hard to understand what it is like for victims of intimate partner violence and what they go through for years on end. This bill would address that. I would like for the Conservatives to understand, get out of the way, as they like to say, support this bill for victims and show survivors that we are listening.

Emma Harrison, Peterborough

Liberal
“We need to pass this bill to prevent crime and save lives. It was written with help from victims and survivors. The Conservatives are blocking it.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I think we can both agree that this bill addresses the issues that have been brought forward and does so in a really thoughtful way, in consultation with survivors and groups that work with survivors and victims. Although I agree with the member that this is long overdue, we are here now. We have an opportunity, but the Conservatives are standing in the way of making sure this bill passes. We can prevent deaths and crime.

Jessica Fancy, South Shore—St. Margarets

Liberal
“I support this bill. It protects women and children by making controlling behaviour by a partner a crime before it turns deadly. It also bans fake sexual images made online and speeds up court cases so victims get justice.”
  • A repeated line

    “187 women were violently killed in Canada.”

    Said 3 times by 3 members since June 9.

    Every time it was said
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to show strong support for Bill C-16, the protecting victims act. This legislation represents one of the most significant updates to Canada’s criminal justice system in generations. It reflects a clear understanding that our laws must evolve to meet the realities that Canadians are facing today, realities that include rising intimate partner violence cases, online exploitation, coercive control and gender-based violence and growing concerns about public confidence in the justice system. At its heart, Bill C-16 is about protection. It is about protecting women, children and survivors and ensuring that victims are treated with dignity, compassion and fairness throughout the justice process. Across Canada and certainly in my province of Nova Scotia, we are witnessing a growing crisis of gender-based and intimate partner violence. Women continue to be harmed, controlled, terrorized and, too often, killed by intimate partners. In 2024, 187 women were violently killed in Canada. That is nearly one woman every two days. These are not isolated incidents. These tragedies occur in large cities, urban neighbourhoods and rural communities, like my riding of South Shore—St. Margarets. We know these realities all too well. While our communities are strong, compassionate and deeply connected, rural communities like mine also face unique barriers when it comes to escaping violence and accessing support. Survivors may live far away from shelters or counselling services. Transportation can be limited. Accessing legal support might require hours of travel. In smaller communities, anonymity can be difficult, and many victims fear not being believed or fear retaliation if they come forward. I have had conversations with frontline organizations in my riding, advocates, survivors and service providers throughout South Shore—St. Margarets. We have made one thing abundantly clear: Our systems must do more to protect victims before violence escalates. This is exactly what Bill C-16 seeks to do. One of the most important aspects of this legislation is the recognition of coercive and controlling behaviour. For years, survivors and advocates have been telling us that abuse is not always physical. It can be emotional. Abuse can be psychological. Abuse can be financial and it can be technical. It can involve intimidation, surveillance, isolation, threats, humiliation, manipulation and fear. We know that coercive control is one of the strongest predictors of lethal violence. Bill C-16 would create a new Criminal Code offence prohibiting patterns of coercive and controlling conduct towards intimate partners. This would allow intervention before violence becomes deadly. “Before” is the key piece that matters, because too often the justice system will react after someone has already been seriously harmed. Organizations throughout South Shore—St. Margarets understand these realities intimately. Be the Peace Institute in my riding has done extraordinarily exceptional work in helping young people and communities build healthier relationships and prevent cycles of violence before they begin. Second Story Women’s Centre, where I was a director before becoming a parliamentarian, continues to provide advocacy, education and support for women navigating violence, inequalities and trauma. The Thriving Twogether Society has become an important community voice in Shelburne, Yarmouth, Digby and Queen’s County, focused on well-being, trauma-informed care and strengthening supports for survivors and their families. Harbour House, a women’s shelter in my riding, continues to provide essential shelter and outreach services for women and children fleeing violence in our communities. These organizations have long understood what this legislation now recognizes in law: Violence is only physical, and intervention must happen earlier. Bill C-16 would also modernize Canada’s laws to address the very real challenges posed by technology-enabled abuse. Remember, I said “technical” earlier. Predators are increasingly using online platforms to exploit women and children. We talk about deepfakes. Before becoming a parliamentarian, I was a teacher, educator and principal, and members can think about some of the cases I had to deal with and talk to parents and survivors about. Deepfake technology is being weaponized to create non-consensual sexual images. For a young girl in the classroom or a young child, members can imagine the trauma for them, their families and these small-knit communities. Children are being targeted through sextortion, online luring and exploitation. Police reported that child sexual exploitation offences are now dramatically higher than they were just over a decade ago. Parents across Canada are deeply concerned, and rightly so. In response, Bill C-16 would strengthen protections against child exploitation, expand offences related to online luring and sextortion, criminalize sexual deepfakes and reinforce some of these mandatory penalties for serious child sexual offences. Our laws must keep pace with technological predators. Another critical pillar within this legislation is strengthening victims’ rights. Too many victims continue to be retraumatized by the justice system. They feel uninformed, ignored, excluded or treated as though they are simply witnesses to their own trauma rather than people deserving dignity and respect. Bill C-16 would strengthen the Canadian Victims Bill of Rights by affirming that victims’ rights would be treated with respect, courtesy, compassion and fairness. It would that ensure that victims receive information proactively, it would strengthen access to testimonial aids and it would recognize victims’ interests in a timely resolution of proceedings. These changes matter, because justice delayed is often justice denied, especially for survivors of sexual violence and intimate partner violence. Many Canadians have watched serious criminal cases collapse due to court delays. How can people get help and move on when these delays in court make them relive their trauma or when perpetrators change lawyers time and time again, restarting proceedings and restarting that trauma? Victims are forced to relive trauma for years sometimes, only to see these proceedings stayed before accountability is ever reached. That undermines confidence in our justice system. Bill C-16 would take practical steps to address these delays while fully respecting charter rights and judicial independence. The proposed legislation would require courts to consider alternatives before imposing stays of proceedings. It would streamline procedures in sexual offence trials. It would also improve efficiency in many of our complex cases. It would help ensure that serious offences are heard on their merits rather than collapsing because of these procedural delays. This is about balancing fairness with accountability, which is something our government stands for. I am wondering why, at report stage, Conservatives are voting down these amendments and this bill. The justice committee heard from dozens of witnesses and reviewed more than 100 amendments. We heard from survivors, advocates—

Jessica Fancy, South Shore—St. Margarets

Liberal
“The member keeps asking the same question about one small change to this bill. Many victims, police groups, child protection groups, and cities support this bill.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 30 of 100

    None of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I would like to recognize that it is same piece of paper that the member has stood up and read from tonight, asking the exact same question about one little piece of an amendment on a huge proactive bill. I would like to tell him about all the people and organizations that we have heard from. I was a member of FEWO with the member across the way when we heard from the hundreds of victims and hundreds of different witnesses. On child protection, the Canadian Centre for Child Protection and other organizations are in favour of this bill. On victims’ rights, we have the Domestic Violence Prevention Society, Humane Canada and Niki Sharma, the attorney general for B.C. I could go on. There are the Federation of Canadian Municipalities and the Canadian Police Association. I can go on all night.

Jessica Fancy, South Shore—St. Margarets

Liberal
“The member across the way is wrong. Just because program funding has an end date does not mean it goes away. We renew and fund these programs again through our budget.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I also have a lot of admiration and respect for that colleague across the way, but in this case, I have to challenge. We talked earlier today about mis- and disinformation, and I feel that this is a case of misinformation. We know that some of the projects and funding streams that we have will sunset. That does not mean that they go away. That means that they get reinvigorated as we pass bills in the House within our economic budget. I would like to say, regarding the member’s question, that it is part of our economic strategy each time we re-fund these programs.

Kristina Tesser Derksen, Milton East—Halton Hills South

Liberal
“Abuse often starts small, with partners controlling someone's money, emotions, or social life. I want to know how this bill makes that kind of control a crime and helps women feel safe coming forward.”
  • Question or comment in debate

    Signal 36 of 100

    Much of this statement went to praise, blame, greetings, routine procedure or general stories rather than reasons, requests or specific points.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, what a heartfelt speech from my colleague. I am so glad I was here to hear it. I have mentioned in the House before that I worked as a family law lawyer. I worked in the violence against women sector, and I worked with women who were fleeing violence at home. Oftentimes, more than once, I would have a woman in my office who would just stop and say, “Gosh, I really do not know how I got here. This is not how I pictured my life.” When she would look back, she would see that the beginning steps were almost imperceptibly small, and it usually started with what we now call coercive control, whether it was financial, emotional or social. I wonder if my colleague would like to comment on how Bill C-16 seeks to address criminalizing coercive control and making women feel more confident in coming forward.

Jessica Fancy, South Shore—St. Margarets

Liberal
“I support this bill. It will protect women and children from controlling partners and make the justice system work faster for them.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for her work as a family lawyer, because sometimes they are the unsung heroes in helping women who are fleeing violence manoeuvre through systems that sometimes have failed them. We talk about the coercive control piece, and the bill would help women. It would protect them and help protect children when they are navigating some of these systems. It would help with some of these delays. It is nice that we are seeing so many of our different crime bills coming here from the government. That has not been done in 20 years, 30 years or 40 years, so it is good that we are making progress on that measure.

Jessica Fancy, South Shore—St. Margarets

Liberal
“Groups in my area work to stop abuse before it happens and support victims when they go to court.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 100 of 100

    Of this reply, 100% addressed the question or point raised.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I served with my colleague across on the status of women committee briefly while I was subbing in for another member and looking at this report. She mentioned prevention. It is the focus of organizations in my riding, like Be the Peace, the Second Story Women’s Centre, Harbour House and Thriving Twogether. They offer preventive measures so that if or when some of these court cases come forward, they have the support systems they deserve.

Discussion

No comments yet

See the full discussion

Comment rules

More from sitting 132

  1. Government Orders Build Canada Homes Act 34 statements
  2. Government Orders Government Orders 39 statements
  3. Oral Questions Rail Transportation 4 statements
  4. Oral Questions The Economy 7 statements
  5. Oral Questions Canadian Identity and Culture 6 statements
  6. Oral Questions The Economy 15 statements
  7. Oral Questions Oil and Gas Industry 4 statements
  8. Oral Questions The Economy 4 statements
  9. Oral Questions Steel and Aluminum Industry 4 statements
  10. Oral Questions International Trade 2 statements
  11. Oral Questions The Economy 10 statements
  12. Oral Questions Diversity and Inclusion 2 statements
  13. Oral Questions Public Safety 9 statements
  14. Oral Questions The Economy 2 statements
  15. Oral Questions Agriculture and Agri-Food 2 statements
  16. Oral Questions International Trade 2 statements
  17. Oral Questions Health 2 statements
  18. Oral Questions Employment 8 statements
  19. Government Orders Build Canada Homes Act 45 statements
  20. Private Members' Business Corrections and Conditional Release Act 7 statements
  21. Government Orders Build Canada Homes Act 59 statements
  22. Government Orders Protecting Victims Act 106 statements
  23. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements