Combatting Hate Act

Bill C-9, Combatting Hate Act · Time allocation motion · now law Where it stands

The House debated a time allocation motion limiting to five further hours debate on the Senate’s amendments to Bill C-9, the Combatting Hate Act, which amends the Criminal Code to address hate propaganda, hate crimes, and access to religious or cultural places. The Liberal side said the bill fulfills a campaign promise, has already had extensive debate in both Houses, protects all faiths and peaceful protest, targets only wilful promotion of hatred, and responds to rising hate crimes; they said Conservative claims about it are misinformation. Conservatives opposed cutting off debate, said religious and faith groups object to the removal of the good-faith religious expression defence, cited a minister’s comments about religious texts, and asked where the line is between practising a religion and committing an offence. The Bloc Québécois said the bill does not ban holy books and accused Conservatives of spreading disinformation, while the Green member opposed the bill and asked for more debate time. Some time at the start went to a point of order about whether a secretary of state, rather than a full minister, could move the motion.Written by AI from the debate. Updated .

Official text (opens in a new tab)

3 statements

Rhéal Éloi Fortin, Rivière-du-Nord

Bloc Québécois
“This bill does not ban holy books like the Bible or the Quran. People can still read them. It only stops people from using religious texts as an excuse to spread hate.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I want to remind the House what the religious exemption that is eliminated by Bill C‑9 refers to, because I am hearing things from our Conservative colleagues and I cannot believe what I am hearing. There was never any question of prohibiting people from reading the Bible, the Torah, the Quran or any other religious text. What is prohibited is spreading hate based on a religious text. Some people use that as an excuse to spread hate, and that is what is being prohibited. That is the defence that will be removed from the Criminal Code. Reading the Bible, the Quran and the Torah is allowed, it always has been, and I hope it always will be.

Andréanne Larouche, Shefford

Bloc Québécois
“The Conservatives are spreading false information about this bill. People will still have the right to protest, but the law must be able to stop protests that spread hate.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I would like to echo the sentiments of my colleague from Rivière-du-Nord and reiterate another point. Certain groups have written to us because there has been a great deal of disinformation coming from the Conservatives. At the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights, the Bloc Québécois tabled certain amendments it felt were essential. During one debate, I even heard people go so far as to say that people would no longer be able to protest. Normally, a protest is a legitimate exercise of freedom of expression. I do hope, however, that if a protest is intended to incite hatred, there will be tools available to intervene.

Rhéal Éloi Fortin, Rivière-du-Nord

Bloc Québécois
“I support this bill to fight hate, and my party will vote for it. Hate harms our society. Even so, I am willing to give the Conservatives more time to debate it if they review it in good faith. Then we could pass it together.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, everything has been said about this bill, including with regard to the religious exemption. Committee proceedings began last October, and in the end, it took time allocation to get it passed. I find that truly deplorable because this is an important bill. Hate is a societal cancer at every level. I support Bill C-9, the Bloc Québécois supports Bill C-9 and we will vote in favour of Bill C-9. However, regarding the question raised by our Conservative colleagues as to whether we should grant them more time to discuss it, I am not opposed to that. Personally, I believe there was a lot of unnecessary filibustering in committee since last fall. Despite that, if our Liberal colleagues agreed to drop time allocation and give the Conservatives more time, we would be willing to agree to that. By the end of the week, we could all come to fully understand Bill C-9 and pass it unanimously. If our Conservative colleagues intend to conduct a good-faith review of this bill, I support them.

Discussion

No comments yet

See the full discussion

Comment rules

More from sitting 136

  1. Private Members' Business Income Tax Act 14 statements
  2. Government Orders Government Business No. 12—Proceedings on Bill C-30 32 statements
  3. Government Orders Government Orders 20 statements
  4. Oral Questions The Economy 12 statements
  5. Oral Questions Government Priorities 6 statements
  6. Oral Questions The Economy 15 statements
  7. Oral Questions Climate Change 4 statements
  8. Oral Questions Seniors 6 statements
  9. Oral Questions Access to Information 6 statements
  10. Oral Questions Artificial Intelligence 2 statements
  11. Oral Questions The Economy 11 statements
  12. Oral Questions Health 2 statements
  13. Oral Questions Public Safety 6 statements
  14. Oral Questions Youth 2 statements
  15. Oral Questions Public Safety 2 statements
  16. Oral Questions Indigenous Affairs 4 statements
  17. Oral Questions Taxation 8 statements
  18. Government Orders Government Business No. 12—Proceedings on Bill C-30 31 statements
  19. Government Orders Government Business No. 12—Proceedings on Bill C-30 50 statements
  20. Government Orders Government Business No. 12—Proceedings on Bill C-30 41 statements
  21. Government Orders Combatting Hate Act 37 statements
  22. Government Orders Combatting Hate Act 38 statements