“I am saying nice things about a bill that spends more money and creates more laws, because it makes me feel good. I really want this bill to pass. It will put more people in jail for longer. I spent many years as a social worker and I saw many sad things. We need to spend more money to stop sad things.”
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 bill to change many criminal laws, mostly about gender-based violence, and amend several other acts too. Creates new crimes like 'coercive control' in intimate partner relationships. Changes rules around things like distributing sexual images. Strengthens penalties for some child sex crimes but also gives judges ways around mandatory minimums if they deem it 'cruel and unusual.' Conservatives focused on prison time in their speeches and accused the Liberals of going too soft. Liberals focused on the bill protecting victims.
“You did good work. But criminals need real jail time. The Supreme Court is too soft. We need to make them punish crime more.”
“I want you to know that I like my colleague and worked with victims and survivors. I think judges need flexibility and we need to tell victims there will be serious consequences for offenders.”
“I'm filling time with kind words, then saying the Liberals rejected our reasonable amendment to make judges consider a range of factors. I want to know why my colleague opposite thinks they did that.”
“I think it's important to understand the whole situation before laying charges. I met with people as a frontline worker and I want to recognize all the circumstances that lead to intimate partner violence.”
“I hope our colleague gets better. Can the member talk about why it's important to make sharing non-consensual intimate images illegal in Bill C-16? I think it's a terrible thing, especially for women.”
“It is very important that we pass Bill C-16 as quickly as possible. Non-consensual intimate images can ruin lives and create chaos. We must do something to stop this.”
“I'm telling you about a bill that spends money and makes laws to protect women and girls. This bill does many things. It makes new crimes. It changes old crimes. It spends money. It changes rules. The government should do all these things to help women and girls. The government should spend lots of money. The government should make more laws. If you vote for this bill, you are helping women and girls.”
“I want to paint the Liberals as soft on crime. If they won't put limits on their bill, I will use that against them.”
“Don't worry about the details. Just trust us. The judges will make good decisions with all the new power we give them.”
“I want to sound like I care about victims. That makes me look good. But I'm really just trying to make the other party look bad.”
“I want to make the bill sound as good and effective as possible. More people should trust in our system, even if they don't need to testify. And it should cover modern technology too.”
“You say the judicial safety valve gives flexibility, but we already have that. Police and prosecutors already use their judgment. I think this just lets judges overrule what Parliament decided. We're supposed to be the ones making these rules, not the courts. And one part of the bill even lets judges ignore minimum sentences for everything but treason and murder. That goes too far. Why are you doing that?”
“I want this bill to pass. It will make our party look like we're doing something about predators. Don't worry, the judges still get to decide what happens.”
“I want the Conservatives on our side for this bill. See, even their old critic agreed with us once. Let's pile on and make them look like they're changing their minds now.”
“I want this bill how the committee wrote it. We put our requirements there for a reason.”
“I'm filling time with kind words about graduation. But actually I want harsh mandatory sentences. Longer sentences for more crimes! Judges shouldn't go below the minimum. The Liberals don't take these crimes seriously. Clause 63 would let criminals off easy. Canadians are sick of weak sentences. I want criminals to know we will punish them. But the other parts of the bill have good stuff too. The Liberals should accept my amendments.”
“I want this bill to pass. It does wonderful things! Coercive control will be a crime now. Some killings will count as first-degree murder. We kept some mandatory minimums too. The Conservatives just don't want to support it. They used to want that safety valve option. Why are they so against making communities safer? They should let this bill pass.”
“That's dumb. You don't really care about crime or victims. You let criminals avoid mandatory minimums. You should support our safeguards to protect victims and keep criminals in jail. But you don't. You voted them down.”
“I'm not sure that was very parliamentary. But I do agree the Conservatives seem to be looking for reasons not to support this bill. They keep bringing up mandatory minimums instead. But I think our system is the best we have. And I'm not sure harsher sentences actually work better than rehab. Do you have any evidence they do?”