Andréanne Larouche · TranslatePolitics.ca

Government Orders

Government Business No. 13—Proceedings on Bill C‑22

2026-06-17

“You and I are both women in a male-dominated field. Even if we disagree, debate is important and shouldn't be stifled. I want to show some respect to a retiring member.”

Government Orders

Combatting Hate Act

2026-06-16

“I want Bloc supporters to see me cheering for women. I want to be seen voting against whatever this is.”

Oral Questions

Housing

2026-06-16

“The federal government must spend more money on housing. It is irresponsible that they haven't increased funding yet.”

Government Orders

Combatting Hate Act

2026-06-15

“Do these tweaks really make the bill stop hate speech? Do we have the right tools for this?”

“I want to agree with my Bloc friend and make another point. Conservatives are spreading fake news. I heard someone say the bill would stop people from protesting. Protesting is free speech. But if a protest is for hate, the bill lets the government have tools to stop it.”

Government Orders

Government Business No. 12—Proceedings on Bill C-30

2026-06-15

“The government didn't listen before. I hope they listen to me now. I want the government to raise gas taxes and spend more on programs I like. That money belongs to us politicians, not you.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I have a quick comment and then a question for my colleague, whom I thank for her speech. I will add my thoughts on this democratic issue. While the government was busy manufacturing its majority, it did not accept any of the 11 recommendations from the Bloc Québécois. In such a context, the government should have talked to us and listened to us. However, this government has a tendency to move further and further away from listening and from democracy. Now, here is my question for my colleague. In terms of the measure in the economic statement on suspending the excise tax on gasoline, some economic experts, including Luc Godbout from Quebec, maintain that it is not a good decision, from the perspective of both a balanced budget and the environment. At a time when we need to invest in our infrastructure and social programs, we just deprived ourselves of a source of revenue. Moreover, experts are saying that there is a risk of forest fires this summer because of climate change and global warming. What does my colleague think about that?

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Statements by Members

Seniors

2026-06-15

“World Elder Abuse Awareness Day is June 15. I think seniors face many problems. I want the New Horizons program to have different rules. The government should spend more money on seniors.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, June 15 is World Elder Abuse Awareness Day. At a time when fraud targeting seniors is gaining attention, let us remember the importance of staying vigilant and taking action against the various types of abuse, including financial abuse. Seniors between the ages of 65 and 74 face age discrimination, since they do not receive the same pension amount as seniors aged 75 and above. This is ageism, another form of abuse. However, rising inflation and housing problems directly impact people living on a fixed income. While there is also growing concern about isolation among seniors, the new requirements of the New Horizons program are making it harder for volunteers to organize activities to help them break out of their isolation. Let us stop ignoring the needs of seniors so that they can age with care, compassion and dignity.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Oral Questions

Seniors

2026-06-11

“You made a bad reform. No one wanted this. It's hurting people. It doesn't fit Quebec. I want more time before the deadline.”

“I want you to delay the new program. Small groups need more time. I don't want them to lose out.”

Government Orders

Bail and Sentencing Reform Act

2026-06-10

“I am on a committee studying homelessness. When the government makes attacking a transit driver extra bad, that will not help drivers much if those attacks come from mental health or homelessness. The government should spend more on health care instead.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I will ask my colleague a question in my capacity as vice‑chair of the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities. The committee is concerned about homelessness and is currently conducting a study on the subject. One of the issues raised by the Bloc Québécois regarding Bill C‑14 has to do with the provision making it an aggravating factor to commit assault against a public transit driver. I have a great deal of respect for public transit drivers. That said, the attacks they are subjected to are often related to mental health issues and even homelessness. The Bloc Québécois believes that, rather than creating aggravating factors, it would have been better for the government to invest in health care to take care of these people and truly protect drivers. That would have been much more effective than simply adding aggravating factors, which may not really help the drivers. What does my colleague think?

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Government Orders

Protecting Victims Act

2026-06-09

“I think prevention is important. I asked the Minister about it yesterday. I hope the committee's report will have good recommendations. Will you agree that prevention is important?”

“Why did you take so long to write this bill? You knew about these problems for years. You only acted because the committee put on pressure. You want credit for this first step but I want people to know you were slow.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, tonight we are debating Bill C‑16, tabled late last year. What still impresses me, however, is the timeline. For months, if not years, the Standing Committee on the Status of Women has been calling for progress on a number of issues: court delays, the criminalization of coercive control and, as the Bloc Québécois and other stakeholders have also urged, the issue of intimate AI-generated images and deepfakes. People have been calling for all that for weeks, months and years. It took a press conference by the Standing Committee on the Status of Women where we displayed non-partisanship, where members from all political parties sitting on that committee called on the government to criminalize coercive control and take action on violence against women. It is an important first step, but why did it take so long?

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

“The victims say we need this bill. I want the government to pass it. We can fix the last 1% later. I want more money for other programs too. We should pass this quickly and move on to more spending.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, based on what I heard tonight in this debate, I am not sure if my Conservative colleague has consulted with his colleagues. There are two things I have taken away from the testimony we heard at the Standing Committee on the Status of Women's recent meetings on the issue of violence against women. First of all, the victims said that Bill C-16 was a necessary step. They said that we needed to take action and make the Criminal Code more effective. Earlier, I heard someone say that we were 99% in agreement. Once we get there, the remaining 1% can be addressed and worked out in a non-partisan manner. The other thing, of course, is that this bill does not solve everything. I acknowledge that, the Bloc Québécois acknowledges it too, and I told the minister so. We will come back with the amendments we proposed. Why not say that we will pass this bill and then work to propose additional measures? We could also address the broader ecosystem, in other words support groups, tackle the housing issue, and continue to work on the Criminal Code. We really need to look at this as a continuum of services.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

“I'm ashamed of you. Stop bickering. This bill is important. I tried to make it better and you didn't listen to me.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I will try to restore some calm because I am ashamed right now. Unfortunately, I am reliving a scene I witnessed at the Standing Committee on the Status of Women, where, instead of listening to victims, my Liberal and Conservative colleagues were bickering back and forth. The victims left in tears, and I am reliving that moment. Members on both sides can laugh and argue about this, but Bill C-16 addresses an issue that is far too important to victims for me to be witnessing what I am seeing right now. I feel ashamed on behalf of victims and survivors. I would like to come back to something. During the study of Bill C-16, the Conservatives filibustered while the Bloc Québécois was trying to be constructive and propose amendments. For example, we consulted legal experts to try to fix a mistake in this bill. The Bloc Québécois wanted to include provisions regarding an objective test. Such provisions would have enabled the judge to take into account the full context, the abuser's history, coercive behaviour and threats against loved ones and pets. That is what the offence itself does. However, even though the amendments we proposed were logical, the Liberals voted them down. I would suggest that everyone calm right down because, seriously, the way we are handling Bill C‑16 right now is not at all in the public interest. Let us keep in mind that the purpose of Bill C‑16 is to find real solutions so there will be no more victims.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

“I'm boasting my party worked on a bill. My party wants to be seen on the side of victims. I want to pressure you to spend more money.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, it is true that committee members worked as non-partisanly as possible. In the course of our other proceedings, members of various parties asked questions of the victims and the witnesses who appeared. Incidentally, as part of other studies, we asked people whether Bill C‑16 should be passed. Everyone we heard from asked us to vote in favour of Bill C‑16 and explained to us why it is such a huge step forward. I would like to point out another step forward. During the previous Parliament, the Bloc Québécois introduced a bill to address the impact of the Jordan decision on court delays. Bill C‑16 addresses this issue too. In this case as well, to avoid further delays in the court system, the government must seriously consider providing the provinces and Quebec with additional resources so they can administer this new legislative framework properly. What are my colleague's thoughts on that?

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

“I want coercive control in the Criminal Code. Police say that will help them intervene sooner. The most important thing is to listen to victims.”

“I support this bill because it adds back some mandatory minimums, like my party wanted. I want us to vote on it now and pass it. We can always make more changes later. I want to work on helping victims and survivors. The other side is spreading misinformation.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, there is a bit of disinformation because the bill we are studying this evening essentially reiterates the Bloc Québécois's proposal to restore mandatory minimums for serious crimes. It also echoes the Bloc Québécois's idea about the potential recruitment of young people at earlier stages and about deepfakes. This bill is making progress on a lot of fronts. I think we have reached the point where we need to put this to a vote. It is time to move forward. I know there is room for improvement. We will have to continue to monitor progress, as I said, because this will not be like waving a magic wand. However, I think that the disinformation needs to stop and that we need to work on making progress, recognizing victims and helping survivors find their way and rebuild their lives.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

“Mr. Speaker, this government program doesn't seem to be working. We don't know what it will amount to. We have questions. Women are stuck. They need help. The steps are being delayed. I think more needs to be done to help women escape the cycle of violence.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, the member is right: Representatives from those Quebec organizations did indeed come to testify about shelters. What we are seeing at this point in time is that wait lists keep getting longer. When I say that waving a magic wand will not fix things, Build Canada Homes is a prime example of that. We do not really know what it will amount to; it is still very unclear. We have a lot of questions. One thing we know for sure is that wait lists are getting longer. More and more women are turning to emergency resources. Without a space in a second-stage shelter, they are stuck at the emergency shelter stage, meaning that other women who need emergency resources cannot get them, so they stay home and cannot access emergency resources. Other women who are ready for that second stage cannot access it because there is no space. After second-stage housing, where do these women go and what do they do? Often, they have their families. We want to ensure that these people are housed safely and with dignity. Sometimes they need supportive housing to ensure follow up. In short, all the steps are being delayed. This is a key issue because it is often the reason why a woman feels she cannot get out. She feels that she is stuck in a cycle of violence because she does not know where to go with her children. It is a huge concern.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

“I want to say the Liberals messed up by voting against our amendments. I want to talk about those same amendments again another time.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, as I said, the Bloc Québécois proposed amendments to try to avoid some of the inconsistencies we see in Bill C-16. As I said in reference to section 810 of the Criminal Code, we want the criteria to be more objective than subjective. That was one of the amendments that had been proposed by my colleague to address this situation. That is the kind of amendment we would have liked to include in the bill, but unfortunately, the Liberals voted against it. So, we will definitely have to bring it up again. The issue of section 810 of the Criminal Code will need to be addressed, because it is clear that this section is not doing its job of ensuring that victims are safe. The Bloc Québécois will continue to closely monitor the issue of section 810 of the Criminal Code.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

“I'm talking a lot about a bill I support. I want more money for housing, shelters, and services for women who experience abuse. I want to make a normal crime really bad by calling it 'coercive control.' I say Quebec knows how to spend the money better than Canada. I hint the bill is not enough but I still support it.”

Official Hansard

This is the third time I have talked about this bill, though I am not a member of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights. This bill ended up being extensively discussed by the Standing Committee on the Status of Women. I have already talked about it a lot. I may come back to Bill C‑16, but I also want to use my speech to talk about the fact that protecting women also requires better housing and local services. I will come back to that. The Bloc Québécois obviously supports the principle of Bill C‑16, which contains a number of important improvements for better protecting victims of violence. In particular, it recognizes coercive control. It strengthens certain victims' rights and modernizes criminal law. However, one fundamental question remains: Can a woman be truly safe if she has nowhere to go after escaping violence? Justice is essential, but our committee also heard over and over that justice alone is not enough. I will begin by talking about the housing issue. I will then move on to the improvements that Bill C‑16 contains. I will close by talking about what makes Quebec different in this domain. A woman fleeing violence first needs a place to live. Behind every criminal record and every case file is a woman who has made the extremely difficult decision to leave her abuser. This decision often means giving up her home, leaving her job, uprooting her children and losing her financial security. Without a housing solution, many women remain trapped in their situations. What we heard at committee from survivors is that shelters are more than just places of refuge. The evidence we heard at the Standing Committee on the Status of Women served as a reminder of this. Shelters are true places of recovery. They provide shelter, psychosocial support, legal assistance, financial aid, support for children and assistance in building autonomy. For many women, it is the first night in a long time that they can sleep without fearing for their lives or those of their loved ones. Housing is also a public safety issue. A woman who leaves an abusive partner often has to choose between returning to her abuser or living in precarious conditions. It is absolutely terrible. She has to wait months for affordable housing. As long as this reality persists, no reform of the Criminal Code will be enough. I have some telling statistics. In 2024-25, Canada had approximately 561 residential shelters for victims of violence. Despite this, officials still identify the lack of affordable housing as one of the main obstacles to a sustainable escape from violence. Research shows that women who have access to second-stage housing are much more likely to rebuild their lives and avoid returning to their abuser. Sexual violence remains vastly under-reported. In fact, nearly nine out of 10 sexual assaults are never reported to the police. In 2024, 81 women were killed by an intimate partner in Canada, including 25 in Quebec. There have already been 10 femicides in 2026. One of the first occurred in Rougemont, in the riding of Shefford. I also mentioned coercive control. I would like to talk about some of the progress this bill will achieve after first discussing the importance of offering abused women more extensive help. Tackling coercive control is an important step forward. The Bloc Québécois welcomes the creation of a coercive control offence. This recognition is essential. It follows on a study that the Standing Committee on the Status of Women did on my suggestion following a request by the Quebec National Assembly and members who had worked on a report on rebuilding trust. However, Ottawa did not budge. Late last year, after a number of years went by, the Standing Committee on the Status of Women held a press conference pointing out that one of the main recommendations in my report was to criminalize coercive control. This recognition is essential. Violence does not always leave visible wounds. The wounds can also be psychological, economic, social, digital or emotional. Financial dependence is often an integral part of this type of control. Even under the best laws, a woman who cannot afford housing or food for her children remains vulnerable. We absolutely need to work toward women's economic empowerment, because we cannot break the cycle of domestic violence if a woman, even after years of trying, cannot accumulate the financial resources needed to escape that violence. She remains trapped in a cycle, in an endless spiral, where the man, to meet his own needs and expectations and to control his victim, exerts financial control over her. We must also consider women's economic empowerment and ways to ensure women can fully take control of their financial lives. Another point that came up during the testimonies before the Standing Committee on the Status of Women is that we cannot overlook older women. Coercive control also affects older adults. What is concerning is that some women endure violence perpetrated by a spouse, a caregiver, or even an adult child. Data also show that there has been a significant increase in cases of domestic violence against older adults in recent years. The system must be able to recognize these specific realities. I also want to talk about the importance of respecting Quebec's areas of jurisdiction, because social services, shelters and housing fall primarily under Quebec's jurisdiction. Let us not forget that. The federal government must financially support these networks without imposing its own conditions. Quebec organizations are familiar with the realities on the ground and already meeting victims' needs. It is therefore important to look at what is being transferred to help the organizations that work with victims. Staff are exhausted, and they need resources and means to care for these victims and care for survivors. Bill C‑16 is not perfect, so the Bloc Québécois had moved some amendments, particularly regarding section 810 of the Criminal Code, which is still far too subjective. At the Standing Committee on the Status of Women, I moved, in collaboration with my Conservative colleagues, that we conduct a study of section 810 of the Criminal Code. The Bloc Québécois wanted to take that aspect out of Bill C‑16, because it has been proven that section 810 conditions can give victims a false sense of security. We moved amendments, and there are some amendments that could have been made to Bill C‑16. However, our chief concern is that the Criminal Code be strengthened and that new offences be created. The Criminal Code is a federal law, however, whereas the application and administration of justice are the responsibility of Quebec and the provinces. I said that to the Minister of Women and Gender Equality yesterday, and I asked her to discuss it with her colleague, the Minister of Justice. If the government does not arrange for money to be transferred to Quebec for the administration of justice, in acknowledgement of the fact that a much bigger burden is going to be placed on Quebec's justice system, it is going to be passing laws that cannot be enforced. There will not be enough resources to take care of victims and survivors properly. In conclusion, the Bloc Québécois will support Bill C‑16. It is a real step forward for victims. However, we must guard against believing that the Criminal Code can fix everything and that it is some kind of magic wand. A woman needs effective justice, safe housing, a bed in a shelter, adequate income and quality psychosocial support. As I told the minister yesterday, the Bloc Québécois will be here to make sure nobody forgets the amendments our party put forward at the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights. The best way to protect women is not only to punish abusers, but also to give victims the practical means to get away and rebuild their lives with dignity. We owe them that because there must be no more victims.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗