Hon. Sean Fraser · TranslatePolitics.ca

Oral Questions

Justice

2026-06-18

“I want to sound tough on crime without upsetting people who want to go easy on drugs. I want everyone to work with me to make our policies popular.”

“You're new and you're doing a good job here. We are making a rule against coercive control to help stop violence against women.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, let me take this opportunity, for the first time, to formally congratulate my recently elected colleague on her presence in the House of Commons. This institution is better for her efforts. Through her advocacy, we have moved forward with reforms that are designed to tackle the scourge of intimate partner violence that is impacting women across this country. We know, when it comes to coercive control, that we have the opportunity to put rules in place that allow the legal system to intervene before a relationship becomes violent and before violence becomes fatal. We have worked with people who have dedicated their life and their career to understanding the predictive factors of what can lead to violence against women. With this codification of coercive control, we can make—

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Oral Questions

Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship

2026-06-18

“I want to sound tough on crime. The courts should send dangerous people to jail for a long time. We made a bill to punish repeat offenders more. Let's all agree on that.”

Oral Questions

Gender-Based Violence

2026-06-18

“I need to say good things about a program I'm paid to support. This bill adds new crimes that were not crimes before. We think people will notice if we put the word 'femicide' in there.”

Oral Questions

Indigenous Affairs

2026-06-18

“I defend the government's decision to appeal a court ruling we disagree with. Also, private property rights are important. We can pursue defending our position and reconciliation at the same time.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, in Canada, when the government disagrees with the decision of a court, the opportunity we have to do something about it is to appeal that decision. We made an appeal on this particular case because we disagree with the superior court's assessment. Since that time, we have seen the New Brunswick Court of Appeal go through the Wolastoqey case, as the member indicates, and the Supreme Court has refused leave. In addition, throughout this piece of litigation, we have been asking the court to notify private property owners so they may participate in litigation and are in fact presently supporting the Montrose application of private property owners in the region. Private property rights are important in this country, so is reconciliation. We can pursue both at the same time.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Oral Questions

Justice

2026-06-18

“I want people to cheer for my political wins. I think these laws will look popular. Law and order!”

Oral Questions

Public Safety

2026-06-17

“I want to cheer for new laws. These laws spend money and add rules. I say this makes things safer.”

Oral Questions

The Economy

2026-06-17

“Liberals want to appear compassionate. We don't exploit people for political gain like the Conservatives. They used to talk about public safety, but we passed some laws about that. We can spend money on other things at the same time and still say we support public safety. Don't question our motives.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, when my Conservative colleagues see a vulnerable Canadian, they see a political opportunity to exploit. We see people who we want to help. This question has been asked and answered. It has been fascinating to me, over the last number of weeks, how the Conservatives have completely dropped their focus on public safety in this country. Let me tell the House why. We have a legislative agenda that is going into effect. The Bail and Sentencing Reform Act is now law in Canada. Later today, we are going to vote on the combatting hate act, and by the end of the week, we are going to adopt the protecting victims act. We can balance the economic interests of the country, the needs of families and public safety at the same time. Let us not just focus on political opportunities.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Oral Questions

Public Safety

2026-06-15

“I'm filling time with kind words and saying nothing anyone could pin down later. We passed a bill. Some other people say they like it. Everyone should agree because they say so.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, the political motivation behind the member's question is obvious, based on the way he phrased it, but if he would like some validation, the bail and sentencing reform act we have put forward in the House is supported by those who work on the front lines. I would invite him to talk to the head of the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police. I would invite him to talk to the head of the Ontario Provincial Police or of the Police Association of Ontario. The legislation we put forward has been informed by leaders in the police movement. It has been informed by provinces and premiers demanding the expeditious adoption of the bail and sentencing reform act. It has been informed by engagement with cities. We will do everything we can to listen to those expert voices to keep Canadians safe.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

“These crimes are bad. We will change the rules. We will make those changes this week. The changes will make it harder for some crimes to get light sentences.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, these kinds of heinous behaviours have no place in Canada, and the Government of Canada has an opportunity to do something about it. I am pleased to share that we expect, this week, we will have changes to Canada's Criminal Code. These include changes that will make it impossible for conditional sentencing orders to be tied to charges impacting crimes such as sexual crimes against children. In addition, last week the House voted on the protecting victims act, which would put in place a number of measures designed specifically to combat child sexual exploitation and child sexual exploitation and abuse material. My hope is that these measures will become law expeditiously, so communities benefit from these protections.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Private Members' Business

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

2026-06-12

“I'm notifying everyone that at the next sitting, a minister will move to end debate on proceeding with Bill C-30.”

Government Orders

Bail and Sentencing Reform Act

2026-06-12

“You say there are loopholes from the Senate amendments, but I don't see any. One amendment just improves data collection and reporting on bail. We're even giving provinces money for that. Another amendment delays some youth justice changes, but that's because Ontario's Conservative government asked us to. They need time to get ready for the changes. You call these 'loopholes' but I disagree. The amendments are reasonable. If you see real loopholes, tell me exactly what they are.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is characterizing amendments from the Senate as loopholes. One of the amendments proposes that we do a better job of collecting and reporting data on bail. We are not just reporting and collecting; we are going to contribute financially to provinces' exercises to do that. Another loophole would be the delayed implementation of certain measures on the Youth Criminal Justice Act, and that comes as a direct request from the Conservative government in Ontario because it has to make sure its system is ready to handle changes to the law. Another proposed amendment is being rejected on the basis of its redundancy. To the extent the member is pointing to loopholes, I would ask him to identify them, because simply, I do not see them.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

“You're right, they did block our last bill. I warned them. They delayed it for months, and they didn't listen. But now we're trying again. Pass our new bill today, so it becomes law before summer. If you delay again, you're the ones stopping us from fighting crime.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, if we go back to the timeline the hon. member is citing, I raised with colleagues in different parties in the House my concern about the shenanigans being played out at justice committee that were preventing the advancement of this bill and the protecting victims act. We are now in a position that reflects precisely the advice we provided to the opposition at the time, which was that we would potentially see months-long delays in the implementation of these bills, which they claim to support. We have an opportunity to take action today to combat extortion, home invasions, auto theft and sexual assault. The only question is whether we are going to act today or months down the road. That kind of delay is senseless and would not offer an ounce of contribution to public safety. We are moving forward. I would ask that all members recognize the urgency with which communities are calling for these measures so we can implement them in law before Parliament rises for the summer.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

“I didn't like your bill. It had problems. Some ideas were okay. We used those. We made our bill bigger. It does more. Police told us to. Other parties too. Everyone helped. Even you. I think your bill was bad. But you helped make this good. Now stop complaining. You're slowing it down. We need to pass this.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, the private member's bill to which the hon. member refers did have some shortcomings, some provisions that I questioned as to whether they would actually promote public safety, other provisions that I questioned about their constitutional validity. However, where there were common ideas that we could collaborate on, we can actually see some of those ideas that came from Conservative members in this bill, one of which is the subject of a further amendment from the Senate committee involving a more restrictive use of sureties for people who have an indictment on their criminal record within the previous 10 years. There are other ideas that were of mutual concern that were reflected in both of our parties' platforms. However, the measures proposed in this bill are far more reaching, more extensive and more clearly reflect the feedback of the Canadian Association of the Chiefs of Police, the Ontario Police Association, even in my own community, the New Glasgow Regional Police. We can look at communities across Canada, we can look at provincial governments across Canada, and see ideas from Liberal, NDP and Conservative Party members alike that found their way into this bill. This has been a model of collaboration through the process. I thank Conservative members for their contribution. I find it objectionable that they seek to now delay some of the advice they provided to me, in terms of the content of this bill that should be implemented.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

“I'm saying you voted against many good things because you disagreed with one part of the bill. Perfection is the enemy of good. Don't lie about your vote.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I regret to inform the hon. member that with her vote yesterday, she placed her objection to one narrow portion of the bill, which only deals with situations where there would be a grossly disproportionate outcome. She said with her vote yesterday that it was more important than dealing with AI deepfakes when it comes to non-consensual intimate images, more important than protecting the victims of child sexual exploitation, more important than the child-luring provisions, more important than the criminal harassment provisions, more important than the femicide provisions and more important than the coercive control provisions. Members may come to realize, as they spend more time in this place, that there is a range of different perspectives and that sometimes perfection can be the enemy of the good. We are not always going to agree on everything, but she should not colour the historical record and say she voted for something when she voted—

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

“I'm filling time and not answering the question.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I question the relevance of the member's question on a debate about time allocation for the bail and sentencing reform act. I have not been at the committee to which he refers, but it is important to recognize that we use a tool where it is appropriate for a particular job. The member suggested that I decried the use of this tool in other circumstances. If members check the record, I did no such thing. However, I recognize that sometimes people have to realize that a scalpel and a sledgehammer are appropriate for different items. When it comes to this particular use of time allocation, we are responding to the urgent call for action from premiers, mayors, law enforcement and concerned Canadians who care about public safety. The Conservative position that we should delay action on bail and sentencing in the face of these calls for action from the parties I just listed is bizarre to me. They have been demanding that I take action, that I implement the very reforms they have an opportunity to vote for, which they supported in the past, and now they are saying we should kick the can down the road. This is a failure of logic in the extreme.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

“I want the protecting victims act to pass now. I want the Conservative party to stop delaying bail reform. I say the Conservative party is being a hypocrite. I say the solutions in the bill are widely agreed on.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, in the preamble to the member's question, she drew into focus the importance of dealing with survivors who are faced with gender-based violence and sexual crimes. We need to move. However, it is hypocrisy in the extreme when the member yesterday voted against the protecting victims act, which deals specifically with the issues that she has just raised. The kind of action that she is asking for in her question is represented in the bill that she is now seeking to delay. We do not need to wait to implement the solutions that are widely agreed upon in this House; they come directly from police leaders, community organizations, mayors and premiers. It is extraordinary to me that the Conservatives have adopted the position, months after this debate has started, that we need to delay action on bail reform. I disagree.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

“We could pass Bill C-14 now. Or we could not. But if we pass Bill C-14, my government says we would be listening to our communities. My government says it would reduce crime. My government says it would help Canadians.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, let us just draw into focus what is at stake. We asked law enforcement leaders, community leaders and elected officials what the priorities are in their communities when it comes to public safety. They said, “We want you to do more when it comes to auto theft. We want you to do more when it comes to home invasions. We want you to do more when it comes to violent extortion and when it comes to sexual assaults. We want you to address specifically the challenges in the bail system and the challenges when it comes to sentencing for these horrific crimes.” We have listened to that feedback. This process has been a model of collaboration with provincial governments, with police leaders and with advocates for public safety. We have an opportunity to directly implement the solutions that we know communities are calling for. The only question we have, as a House, is whether we want to take advantage of the opportunity to do that now, or whether we can kick the can down the road for several months. In my view, when we have an opportunity to make a difference that is going to serve the interests of Canadians, reduce crime in this country and promote public safety, we should take it at the first opportunity.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

“I want to pass this bill right away. People want it. Don't delay my bill.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I am not aware of the potential adjournment date the House may be looking at, but I do know that the sitting schedule, as broadcasted publicly, is set to expire at the end of next week. I have a responsibility, in my view, to make good on the commitments that I have made and to respect the feedback I have received from premiers, mayors and law enforcement leaders across this country, to implement the criminal law reforms that I believe will contribute to public safety. This is a key piece of the puzzle. We also need to support those on the front line, both police and community organizations, and make upstream investments in mental health and addictions, affordable housing and programs that support at-risk youth. However, I do not think we can afford to delay, potentially months, the implementation of the measures that I know our counterparts from different walks of life across this country are screaming for and demanding that this House take action on expeditiously.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

“You didn't ask a question. Your party is only delaying my bill. But many people agree with me. We should pass the bill now. Stop talking about other things.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, there was not a question that I could observe in the member's statement, but he did cite that he has an obligation as a member of the opposition. I would ask him to talk to his colleagues on the justice committee, who, in my view, have failed to live up to that obligation. He says they should raise issues to improve the strength of the bill when they spent months filibustering, again talking about their preference for puppies or kittens, knowing they were going to delay the implementation of these measures. We have an opportunity to move forward with the measures the Conservative Party says it supports, but yet delays the implementation of them. We should get beyond the political back-and-forth and realize where we have widespread consensus, supported by law enforcement, provincial governments, cities and parliamentarians in the House and in the Senate from a wide range of regions and political affiliations. I suggest we should take the opportunity before us to implement these measures today.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗