Relieving Grieving Parents of an Administrative Burden Act (Evan's Law)

Bill C-222, Relieving Grieving Parents of an Administrative Burden Act (Evan's Law) · Report stage · now at second reading in the Senate Where it stands

What Bill C-222 would do

The bill would allow a person receiving Employment Insurance benefits to care for a newborn or newly adopted child to keep receiving those benefits if the child dies during that period. It would also amend the Canada Labour Code so that an employee remains entitled to maternity or parental leave if the child dies during their leave.

Official text (opens in a new tab)

2 statements

Andréanne Larouche, Shefford

Bloc Québécois
“I support this bill and want it to pass. It lets parents keep their parental leave and employment insurance benefits if their baby dies. Right now, grieving parents have to prove their sadness to the government every two weeks to keep getting help. That is cruel. Quebec already protects parents this way, and federal workers deserve the same care. This bill is a good start, but the government still needs to fix the rest of the employment insurance system.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, this evening I am speaking to Bill C-222, which seeks to amend the Employment Insurance Act and the Canada Labour Code. This bill is sponsored by the member for Burnaby North—Seymour, and I want to commend him for introducing this legislation. It is a bill on a sensitive issue that provides for the following: ...a person to whom employment insurance benefits are payable to care for a newborn child or a child placed with them for the purpose of adoption remains eligible to receive those benefits even if the child dies during the benefit period. The bill further provides that an employee remains entitled to maternity or parental leave in the event that the employee’s newborn child, or a child placed in the employee’s care with a view to adoption, dies during the period of leave. This bill, which is non-partisan and crosses party lines, is compassionate and appropriate, as it seeks to ease the financial and psychological pressure on families who have lost a child. This is a bill that addresses a real problem, and we are confident that Quebeckers and Canadians will benefit from these measures. This is a real game-changer for families dealing with such tragedies. Let us hope that reality will prove the old saying wrong, however, because it is never too late to right the wrongs of the gutting of EI and workers’ rights that occurred under Conservative governments. Let us not forget that, over the past 10 years, minor adjustments have been made without ever addressing the profound injustices against workers and EI recipients. Despite the Liberals’ election pledges and commitments, nothing substantial has been tabled in this decade. Labour organizations in Quebec and Canada and the opposition parties, including the Bloc Québécois—which echoed the main criticisms made by the unions—have made many demands over the past decade. That is why the Bloc Québécois condemns the inaction and obstruction of the Liberals, who voted against Bloc bills and motions to support workers and allow more people to access EI. However, we are persistent and we will once again table a bill for a more comprehensive reform of EI. Let us get back to the bill before us. As we saw during the committee study of the current bill sponsored by the member for Burnaby North—Seymour, the cabinet and the Prime Minister quickly made a commitment to the Liberal member to offer their support and a promise that his private member’s bill would receive the necessary royal recommendations, a crucial step for any private member’s bill requiring new public funds. I will quote a few figures. Infant mortality has remained relatively stable since the early 2000s in Quebec. The Institut de la statistique du Québec has counted approximately 380 child deaths before the age of one. The infant mortality rate for both sexes is 4.9 per 1,000 births. In the rest of Canada, the rate is slightly higher but not statistically significant. Among the countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, or OECD, we have one of the lowest infant mortality rates in the world. Fortunately, this tragic occurrence is pretty rare, as we can see from the figures. Having seen the Liberals’ tendency to cite the state of the public finances whenever they want to justify saying no, whether to a comprehensive reform of the Employment Insurance Act or to old age security benefits for those aged 65 to 74, the low infant mortality rate means that this enhancement to the EI program and the Canada Labour Code should come at very little cost. For those affected by such tragedies, however, a measure such as Bill C-222 would make all the difference and allow claimants to grieve with greater peace of mind, free from financial anxiety. As we see time and again, Quebec is at the forefront when it comes to socially oriented public policies. Thanks to the Quebec Parental Insurance Plan, or QPIP, Quebeckers already have a social safety net with the same criteria as those set out in Bill C-222. It is understood that a claimant may apply for QPIP benefits even if a child dies after a claim has been initiated. By contacting the plan’s customer service department, claimants can receive the information and assistance they need from a representative. As a result, they receive personalized support tailored to their needs. The plan also specifies that the death of a child has no effect on benefit payments, since QPIP provides for a grace period following pregnancy or childbirth. Naturally, this also applies if a parent is grieving the loss of a child. It is worth noting that, in 1972, Quebec passed the Crime Victims Compensation Act, which allows victims to receive compensation and the care they need to recover. This law sets out a financial compensation regime for any income losses the victim experiences. In December 2007, without specifically addressing the death of a child, the Quebec act respecting labour standards with regard to absences and leave included provisions that provided compensation for employees who are victims of crime, employees who have lost a loved one as a result of a criminal act or suicide and employees whose child goes missing. The Bloc Québécois believes that workers who are employed by a federally regulated businesses should have the same protections. Furthermore, there is a clear parallel between Bill C-222 and Quebec’s political action. It is also worth noting that, when the committee tabled its report in the House on May 29, 2026, the bill’s sponsor was particularly proud that his government gave royal recommendation to his bill. That is great. That is the pivotal stage where the executive branch must give its approval when a private member’s bill requires a commitment of public funds. It is important to point out that this is the fourth time in the history of Canada that a private member’s bill has managed to make it past this legislative step. The member also mentioned that there are approximately 1,600 Canadian families a year who experience the death of a child. According to him, it is unconscionable to ask parents to contact Service Canada every 14 days to justify their need for employment insurance sickness benefits. Bill C-222 seeks to address this cold and callous measure under which parents cease to be eligible for parental benefits. The amendments presented at report stage were specifically intended to prevent benefits from ending abruptly. They would allow parental benefits to continue, whether under the standard 40-week benefit period or the extended 69-week benefit period, including in cases where benefits have been extended because of a child’s hospitalization. If a child tragically dies at the end of a parent’s EI benefits period, each parent will be eligible for five additional weeks. In addition, the bill provides for a 17-week extension of bereavement leave with job protection. Lastly, grieving parents will only have to submit an attestation, sparing them the burden of submitting documentation every two weeks. To achieve this result, the Liberals tried to put forward some amendments to their colleague’s bill in committee, but several were ruled out of order by the chair because they required a royal recommendation. Furthermore, the parliamentary secretary had very little understanding of the amendments she was proposing and was of little help. Things were a bit confusing in committee, which significantly slowed down the work. Finally, the Liberals proposed amendments on May 27, 2026. It should be noted that these provisions are very similar to the ones that were rejected by the committee chair because they all involved expenditures and therefore required a royal recommendation from the government. For example, one amendment sought to add a new ground for extending the benefit period under section 10 of the Employment Insurance Act if a claimant’s child dies during the period in which parental benefits may be paid. This amendment would ensure that a claimant can receive up to 26 additional weeks of EI parental benefits after the death of their child. Parents came to testify in committee and their stories were deeply moving. Tears were shed during the committee’s proceedings. It was not easy. The parents simply asked us to allow them to grieve in peace and, above all, without having to battle bureaucracy. Honestly, I do not think anyone ever fully recovers from the tragic death of a child. I am thinking of those bereaved parents. The Bloc Québécois is, of course, in favour of this bill, because our political party has always advocated measures that go even further. We have consistently maintained that a 50-week period is appropriate. We have long advocated for this through the “Émilie Sansfaçon” bill. Although different, our proposal was intended to assist claimants facing a serious illness. Through this motion, the government is proposing to extend this period to 52 weeks. We welcome this measure, having long maintained that a stillbirth, a miscarriage or sudden infant death are profoundly traumatic experiences. We therefore agree that parents should be entitled to a 52-week period of respite to grieve, heal and come to terms with the loss of a child. All that remains is to take action on behalf of seriously ill workers. This is a battle that still needs to be fought, and for which we have already tabled the “Émilie Sansfaçon” bill. We must stop inflicting financial distress on these workers, as it is profoundly unfair. This is a good start tonight. It is an important step, but it is far from the end of the fight.

Braedon Clark, Sackville—Bedford—Preston

Liberal

Linked statement

“I want the House to pass this bill. Right now, parental benefits stop if a child dies, and grieving parents must deal with paperwork and repay money. This bill lets parents keep their benefits and time off work so they can grieve without stress.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to rise today to speak in support of Bill C-222, an act to amend the Employment Insurance Act and the Canada Labour Code regarding the death of a child, also known as Evan’s law. I am pleased that all members who spoke during the first hour of debate of report stage expressed their support for the proposed amendments. The revised bill demonstrates that members of Parliament share a deep commitment to Canadian parents and a common understanding that when a parent faces the unimaginable loss of a child, they expect compassion, dignity and care from us. Nothing in life is as profoundly devastating as the death of a child. It completely turns the parents’ life upside down. In such moments, parents are consumed by their grief. Bureaucracy, money and work should not stand in the way of their recovery, yet under the current framework, they often do. This is not intentional and is what Bill C-222 aims to fix. The hon. member for Burnaby North—Seymour deserves thanks for his leadership and perseverance in seeing this through and for his unwavering support to many parents across Canada. I would also like to thank the many colleagues, stakeholders, witnesses and advocates who all contributed greatly to the development and improvement of this important bill. Their voices have been essential in shaping a bill that truly reflects the reality faced by grieving parents. Our government has long recognized that balancing family and work obligations can be challenging for Canadians raising children, in addition to the financial stress that can come with it. Every parent’s situation is unique, and our support systems should be able to adapt as much as possible. Over the years, we have taken important steps to modernize EI maternity and parental benefits so that parents have more flexibility. This includes allowing maternity benefits to begin earlier, up to 12 weeks before the due date, compared to the previous eight weeks, if mothers need to begin receiving benefits earlier. It also includes offering parents a choice between standard or extended parental benefits and providing more weeks of benefits for parents who share them. These measures reflect an effort to build an EI system that is responsive, flexible and sustainable and that supports families through major life events. Grieving the death of a child is a major life event that the current EI system does not provide enough flexibility and compassion for. Losing a child is a tragedy that requires a compassionate and thoughtful response. This is exactly what the amended Bill C-222 aims to fix. Currently when a child passes away, EI parental benefits stop. If parents do not notify Service Canada, they may unknowingly incur an overpayment and therefore have to repay. Parents can transition to EI sickness benefits, but they are required to report every two weeks. This is an administrative burden that is often overwhelming for grieving parents. This is not the compassion and understanding that Canadians rightly expect from their institutions. That is why Bill C-222, with the amendments before us, aims to correct the situation. It proposes that parental benefits may continue following the death of a child, alleviating the need for parents to navigate complex administrative processes at a time when they are least able to do so. It would allow EI parental benefits to continue for up to the maximum duration already established, which is up to 40 weeks for those who select standard benefits and up to 69 weeks for those who select extended parental benefits. More importantly, for parents who would be near the end of their benefits when their child passes away, the amended bill would ensure that eligible parents may receive up to five additional weeks of benefits as bereavement support. This provision would apply to both the standard and the extended benefits that were originally chosen. These additional weeks would be paid at the same income replacement rate selected at the outset, providing continuity and predictability to parents during such a difficult time. Another important aspect of these amendments is the effort to minimize the administrative burden. While there may be some circumstances where parents would still need to notify the the Canada Employment Insurance Commission, through Service Canada, the bill would introduce a regulation-making authority to make this process simpler and more compassionate. That is a key improvement. In parallel, these amendments would also ensure that employees in the federally regulated private sector continue to have access to job-protected leave provisions under the Canada Labour Code while they avail themselves of EI parental benefits, including if they receive the additional weeks of up to five weeks. These include access to the remaining weeks of parental leave. For employees near the end of their leave at the time of the death of the child, they would be allowed to transition to the current eight weeks of bereavement leave for the death of a child, ensuring that parents do not have to choose between grieving and going to work. These legislative changes are part of a broader effort by the government to strengthen the social safety net and ensure that federal support systems are responsive to the realities that Canadians face. We have made significant investments in employment insurance and related programs, to provide meaningful assistance where it is most needed. For example, caregiving benefits have long supported Canadians who must step away from work to care for an ill or injured family member, including, of course, a child. In 2022, EI sickness benefits were expanded, extending their duration so individual families facing illness or injury have greater financial security and job protection as they recover. These changes were informed by consultations with Canadians and reflect an understanding of how caregiving responsibilities and health challenges shape people’s lives. Equally important is the work being done to improve how Canadians access these services. Making benefits easier to obtain can provide significant peace of mind, especially during times of crisis. At its peak, the EI system was managing more than one million claims during the COVID-19 pandemic, which is more than five times the usual volume. In response, the government expanded its capacity, streamlined processes and implemented new approaches. Since then, we have continued our efforts. Between 2022 and 2025, Service Canada employees worked to refine procedures, test new strategies and improve delivery. As a result, backlogs have been significantly reduced, by 73%, as of January of this year. This progress illustrates that government systems can evolve to be more responsive, efficient and compassionate. When we consider Bill C-222 and the related amendments before us, we must remember that this legislation is about people. It is about ensuring that in the moments darkest for parents, government processes are not an additional source of stress or hardship. By allowing parental benefits to continue, by simplifying requirements and by ensuring that employees in the federally-regulated private sector have access to job-protected leave, these amendments would take steps toward that goal. For all these reasons, I am pleased to support Bill C-222 with the proposed amendments, and I encourage all members of the House to do the same.

Discussion

No comments yet

See the full discussion

Comment rules

More from sitting 156

  1. Government Orders Business of Supply 105 statements
  2. Oral Questions The Economy 8 statements
  3. Oral Questions Housing 6 statements
  4. Oral Questions Oil and Gas Industry 4 statements
  5. Oral Questions Finance 10 statements
  6. Oral Questions Labour 4 statements
  7. Oral Questions Steel and Aluminum Industry 5 statements
  8. Oral Questions Veterans Affairs 2 statements
  9. Oral Questions Housing 8 statements
  10. Oral Questions Intergovernmental Relations 6 statements
  11. Oral Questions Government Appointments 4 statements
  12. Oral Questions Fisheries and Oceans 8 statements
  13. Oral Questions Youth 2 statements
  14. Oral Questions Small Business 2 statements
  15. Oral Questions Natural Resources 6 statements
  16. Oral Questions International Trade 2 statements
  17. Oral Questions Rail Transportation 2 statements
  18. Oral Questions Marine Transportation 2 statements
  19. Government Orders Business of Supply 41 statements
  20. Oral Questions Natural Resources 2 statements
  21. Government Orders Business of Supply 17 statements
  22. Private Members' Business Relieving Grieving Parents of an Administrative Burden Act (Evan's Law) 2 statements
  23. Government Orders Committees of the House 2 statements
  24. Private Members' Business Relieving Grieving Parents of an Administrative Burden Act (Evan's Law) 4 statements
  25. Orders of the Day Concurrence in Committee Reports 71 statements
  26. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements
  27. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements
  28. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements