Ruby Sahota

Mr. Speaker, we have strengthened our Criminal Code of Canada over the last year. We made over 80 different changes with the Bail and Sentencing Reform Act and over 90 different changes with the Protecting Victims Act. We are seeing results across the country. Crime stats are coming down, and there has been the biggest drop in homicides since 1986. We are result-focused, and we are seeing the results.

Mr. Speaker, we have been working aggressively and diligently to reform the Criminal Code of Canada over the last 15 months. However, we are very careful in making sure that we pass legislation in this House that will stand up to our Constitution and to the Supreme Court of Canada. The Conservatives believe in creating laws in this House, and confusing Canadians with laws, that are never going to withstand a charter challenge. We are open to making reforms, but we will make the reforms that are right for our country and for Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, although I respect the sentiment, this is not Liberal parole. We have not made changes under this government. People do not get parole every single time. For instance, in this case, the assailant has not gotten parole. Therefore, I think a lot of what is being said by the Conservatives is not factual. They are trying to politicize this matter. As I have said before, we are open to amendments that are appropriate.

Mr. Speaker, that is completely incorrect. It has not been the Conservatives' role in the current Parliament to keep Canadians safe. That is the job of the government, and that is the job we have been doing. All they have done all along is delay. They delayed lawful access. They voted against Bill C-16, the protecting victims' rights bill. They also voted against strengthening hate crime laws in this country. They are not for public safety. They are for letting criminals go free.

Mr. Speaker, on the day of his funeral, I ask all members to join me in honouring OPP Constable Tarun Bali, who made the ultimate sacrifice in the line of duty, and in extending our heartfelt condolences to his loved ones and fellow officers. We are seeing media reporting in Canada and elsewhere that these shooters were paid for hire, and reports also suggesting that they were paid for by foreign actors. I want to make it clear that my comments were aimed to echo what is being reported on by media and what Toronto Police Chief Demkiw has said and believes is the case.

Mr. Speaker, Canadians have questions, victims have questions and the police chiefs have questions as to why it has taken so long for Bill C-22, which was originally Bill C-2, to get through the legislative process. Every day that we wait, more and more victims are created in Canada. Take, for example, the shootings at the synagogues that have just happened recently. Those shooters were paid and hired by a foreign entity, in our country, online. Had we been able to find those shooters sooner, there would have been fewer victims.

Mr. Speaker, where are the Conservatives who used to care about protecting Canadians? They are not in this House. It is the government that has committed to protecting Canadians through our various bills that we have progressed through this House. Bill C-16 would protect children from child predators, and the Conservatives voted against it. It is an all-time low.

Madam Speaker, throughout the debate, I have heard the Conservatives make reference to, “Why do we need this bill at all? We already have existing laws.” It is really surprising to me, hearing that come from the Conservatives, considering they claim to be tough on crime and want longer sentences. In this bill, a simple assault committed due to hate would go from five years to 10 years in prison. Sexual assault with a weapon causing bodily harm would go from 14 years to life in prison. This bill would provide for longer, appropriate sentences and appropriate punishment for those who commit crimes involving hate. I want to know what the parliamentary secretary thinks about that. Are the Conservatives even tough on crime anymore?

Mr. Speaker, the member talks about underlying crimes that are in the code already, such as assault or mischief. This bill would take the penalties for those crimes and double them for people who would dare prevent somebody from going into their synagogue. I know the community is supportive of this bill, because it would give longer and more meaningful, substantial penalties for those who commit hate crimes in Canada.

Mr. Speaker, this Conservative opposition is not about scrutinizing bills. We are up for scrutiny. We have amended many of our bills, including Bill C-22. Bill C-22 is a bill that we in Parliament have tried to bring many times because, as I know the Conservatives recognize, we need modern tools to fight terrorism and to fight organized crime, but these Conservatives do not really care. They will oppose anything. Just last week, they opposed harsher sentences for child predators. Who are these people?

Mr. Speaker, I think the members of the business council should also be informed that the Conservative Party of Canada did nothing to assist in our bail and sentencing reform bill. If anything, it has impeded our ability to progress in making changes to the Criminal Code of Canada to make sentences harder and to make sure we give police the tools they need through Bill C-22. They have been blocking it for months now, and they need to help law enforcement so its members can arrest and charge criminals.

moved: That, in relation to Bill C-9, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (hate propaganda, hate crime and access to religious or cultural places), not more than five further hours shall be allotted to the stage of consideration of the Senate amendment to the Bill; and That, at the expiry of the five hours provided for the consideration of the said stage of the said Bill, any proceedings before the House shall be interrupted, if required for the purpose of this Order, and, in turn, every question necessary for the disposal of the said stage of the Bill then under consideration shall be put forthwith and successively without further debate or amendment.

Mr. Speaker, this is a platform promise that our newly elected government made last May. This bill was introduced on September 19, and it has gone through all the democratic channels through this legislative process. I believe it is now time for us to end debate on the bill so that Canadians can be safe in their places of worship.

Mr. Speaker, this bill is very targeted and would address hate crime with the mens rea, the intent, to wilfully promote hate. I believe that is constitutional and is within the means. It would protect all faiths in this country. The intention of the bill is to protect Canadians and to make sure that people are deterred from committing hate crimes in Canada.

Mr. Speaker, I would agree. In addition to that, we included, for greater certainty, a clause to clarify that nothing prevents a person from communicating statements on matters of public interest, such as religious, political or scientific matters, if they do not wilfully promote hatred against an identifiable group or wilfully promote anti-Semitism.

Mr. Speaker, this bill has had an unprecedented number of hours of debate, whether in the House or at committee. Like I said previously, it was tabled in the House September 19. Let me be clear, because there is a lot of misinformation about the bill. I too have been receiving a lot of calls, but I have been trying to correct the narrative, because many people misunderstand and have misinterpreted the bill. The intimidation and obstruction offence in the bill would not criminalize expression or peaceful assembly, including lawful protests or other forms of public communication.

Mr. Speaker, many community groups have been asking for the government to take action, as we have seen a rise in hate crimes against many people of different ethnic backgrounds, religions and races. This is important. The LGBTQ community has also faced a rise in hate in this country. This is part of a larger set of initiatives that we as a government are taking. There is the Canada community security program, which we have heavily invested in. There is Canada's action plan on combatting hate. We are doing work to collect data. However, it is important to also deter and punish those who take part in hate crimes. Those who commit them will face harsher penalties after the bill is passed.

Mr. Speaker, this legislation has been considered in the House. It has been considered in the other place. Amendments have been made in both Houses of Parliament, and the bill has come back for genuine debate. I know the Conservative Party of Canada has been busy for many months spreading a misinformation campaign, so we have been getting a lot of calls from people thinking stuff is in the bill that is not. It is a short bill. It is very targeted, and it is in compliance of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It would not limit anyone's ability to practise their faith in this country.

Mr. Speaker, through the committee process, a lot of good ideas came forward. In this bill, we have a clear definition of what hatred means. It was taken from Supreme Court precedents and those from other levels of court as well. The definition of “hatred” has been well established in this country, so it is very clear. Considering the fact that the Attorney General's consent would also be required in this bill, there would be an additional safeguard provided. Work has been done on the bill, and I thank all parties for contributing, but it is time to get this passed so we can protect Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, protesting is a fundamental right in this country, and this bill would not limit the right of peaceful protest, but it should be recognized that under section 1 of the charter, rights and freedoms may be subject to reasonable limits if those limits are prescribed by law and demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society. Those who are not wilfully participating in hate would not end up being charged under any provision of the bill. There has been a lot of misinformation. I want to reassure Canadians that the bill was brought forward with good intentions after lots of consultation and demand from communities, because we have seen these acts of violence increase in this country and we want to make sure that the government sets the precedent that we will not tolerate hate in our country.