Andréanne Larouche
Shefford, Quebec · Bloc Québécois · Canada
“Mr. Speaker, I would also like to join my colleagues in wishing the member a happy retirement. As women in politics, she and I help make up barely 30% of Parliament. I truly wish her a wonderful retirement. Although we do not always share the same values, we live in a healthy democracy.”
“Mr. Speaker, with just two weeks to go before July 1, hundreds of people still cannot find housing and are at risk of becoming homeless. Municipalities are investing to address the unprecedented homelessness crisis, including Montreal, which has tripled its budget. Quebec has also increased funding for this issue in its latest budget.”
“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.”
“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.”
“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.”
“Mr. Speaker, I will be brief. I listened carefully to my colleague. Does he believe that the amendments proposed in committee will really ensure that the bill effectively addresses this hate speech that should not even be happening in the first place? Does he believe we have the necessary tools to tie all this together properly?”
The complete record
Every one of 640 lines we hold for Andréanne Larouche, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 9 of 13.
“Last Friday, I took part in a women's finance day organized back home, in Granby. I heard powerful accounts from women who are now successful, but were once victims of violence, unable to escape their situation because they were trapped in a cycle of poverty. Once they decided to empower themselves economically, to lift themselves out of poverty, find a job and develop their personal wealth, they managed to break free from the cycle of violence. Where does the responsibility lie? The federal government is amending the Criminal Code, but justice is administered by Quebec and the provinces, which lack funding. This is often overlooked, but it is another example of a fiscal imbalance that is making it hard to hire judges. As we have seen, the federal government is dragging its feet on appointing them.”
“Addictions are also exacerbating this crisis. Because federal health transfers are lacking, we cannot seriously address this issue, which should be seen as a public health issue. Insufficient psychosocial services is also among the causes. We use a different model in Quebec, where health and public services are combined. As I often say in committee, Quebec's community groups benefit from the system we set up, rather than relying exclusively on a hospital-centred approach. At least, that is our hope. Our system of community groups and psychosocial services are an integral part of what a victim care pathway should provide. Extreme poverty also drives people to commit crime. Once again, I see a connection with the fact that it keeps women in a cycle of domestic violence.”
“There is also a risk of pretrial detention turning into automatic detention in a large number of cases. We therefore need to study this further. (1645) The Bloc Québécois supports the bill, but I would say we have concerns. We want to vote to send the bill to committee, but, as I said, we have many reservations. The main thing we want to do is protect victims at all costs without undermining the presumption of innocence. It is about finding a balance. I would like to turn to another subject and talk about the real causes of crime. Experts have repeatedly said that the housing crisis is throwing a wrench in the works. There is clearly a compelling connection. When a woman cannot find housing, she will not leave the cycle of domestic violence and poverty because she does not want to end up on the street.”
“Bill C‑14 increases the number of situations where the accused must prove that they can be released. These include motor vehicle theft, extortion and breaking and entering a dwelling-house. Human trafficking offences are also being added. I would be interested in looking into this a little more, because right now, the All Party Parliamentary Group to End Modern Slavery and Human Trafficking, a non-partisan group that I am part of and that is studying this issue, is seeing statistics that show a worrying increase. Could this bill address a growing problem? We will have to see. There are also offences involving choking, suffocation and strangulation during an assault. Several victims have told us about these horrors. This seems to be a recurring theme in assault cases. In committee, we heard some rather disturbing testimony from victims.”
“In addition, only 26.51% remained in custody following a conviction. This suggests that the problem is not bail, or at least, that remains to be determined. Rather, the problem is a slow-moving system and a lack of resources. Bill C-14 specifies that the principle of restraint "does not require the accused to be released". That is in clause 14, but it goes against the presumption of innocence and the St-Cloud, Antic and Zora decisions, which define release as the rule and detention as the exception. We in the Bloc Québécois are concerned about the decline in judicial independence and judges having less discretionary power. We want to study that aspect in committee. There is also an increase in the number of instances where the burden of proof is reversed.”
“The bill is a political response to high-profile cases involving violent repeat offenders, including certain inmates released in Manitoba. As we know, there are even places in Canada where domestic violence against women is said to have reached epidemic proportions. This is a serious issue. We acknowledge it. We know that the Conservatives are pushing for an even tougher approach, particularly with Bill C-242 . They often take a populist, "three strikes and you're out" approach. Would that necessarily be helpful? We are not so sure. What we are seeing right now is that the system is already under pressure. Here are some statistics: In 2022-23, 72.56% of people in custody in Canada were awaiting trial. That was an all-time high. In 2019 and 2020, it was 64.89%. That represents an increase of almost 8% in three years.”
“I expressed reservations because I saw no reason not to study the justice system concurrently at the Standing Committee on the Status of Women, focusing specifically on women's lack of confidence. In too many cases, women do not report their attackers because they have lost faith in the system. I said that we could go ahead with the study and then look at the bill. Now I realize that what I am going to talk about today are the reservations that Bloc Québécois members will express in committee when we have the opportunity, we hope, to take a somewhat closer look at this bill. That was my introduction. First, let us consider the broader context. The Liberal government is introducing Bill C-14 to make it harder to get bail.”
“Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak about Bill C‑14 on the issue of bail and justice system reform more broadly, which is something that the Standing Committee on the Status of Women is currently studying. I proposed that the committee study the use of section 810 of the Criminal Code of Canada to see whether it is appropriate in terms of ensuring the safety of women who are victims of domestic violence, in particular. Together with the Conservatives, we also wanted to look at bail and other aspects of the justice system to see whether it adequately meets the needs of women who are victims of domestic violence. I remember my female Liberal colleagues telling me there was no need to do this study because a bill was on its way that would deal with violence against women.”
“This is nowhere near what cities and Quebec have asked for in terms of infrastructure. What does my colleague think about the fact that this budget increases the fiscal imbalance?”
“Mr. Speaker, it seems to me that my colleague's speech further highlights the issue of fiscal imbalance. He said that the money is in Ottawa, but the obligations and commitments are in Quebec City. Earlier, I asked one of my colleagues a question about health transfers, which are not in there. They are putting $5 billion into hospitals, but, as health care workers told me this week, that is a hospital-centric vision and is not going to provide the health care system with the means and human resources it needs. Another area that contributes to this fiscal imbalance is infrastructure. I am not the only one saying this. Even people in Quebec City are saying it. We are also hearing it more and more from municipalities, especially with climate change impacting municipal finances and infrastructure. We are far from where we need to be.”
“Mr. Speaker, another major disappointment is the issue of health and health transfers, which was largely overlooked in this budget. The government boasts about having invested in hospital infrastructure. This week, I met with health care representatives after the budget was tabled. They told me that it is good to build hospitals, but if the government does not transfer the necessary funding to pay for health care staff, to pay for research and to approve drugs, this is just a broken promise. What does my colleague have to say to these health care representatives? It is great to focus on hospitals, but they also need to be staffed and taken care of.”
“Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her speech. I would like to pick up on what the Conservative member who spoke before me asked her. Frankly, it is insulting. This budget is an insult to seniors. The New Horizons for Seniors program was renewed, as is only right, but there is not a penny more. It is great that there will be activities to help seniors feel less isolated, but they will not have enough money to go anywhere. Seriously, the only thing people aged 65 to 74 want the government to do is correct the unacceptable unfairness that emerged when it created two classes of seniors. Poverty does not wait until people turn 75; nor does illness. Why is the government bent on maintaining two classes of seniors and subjecting those aged 65 to 74 to financial insecurity?”
“Madam Speaker, in his speech, my colleague addressed the rather worrisome issue of these lost Canadians. We are aware that there is a court ruling, and the amendments we proposed respond to the court's ruling. We want to determine what constitutes a substantial connection to Canada. As a matter of fact, we copied the naturalization requirements for second-generation children born abroad so that there would be one set of rules for everyone. What does my colleague think about that?”
“Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech in which he talked about the complex immigration cases that are handled in constituency offices. Since Granby, in my riding, is a welcoming place, this issue keeps city staff very busy. I want to acknowledge them and thank them for their hard work. What we are asking for is a reform, a review of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, which is is very archaic and not very humane. That is what people are saying. It needs to be re-examined. This is my question. The amendments we proposed were aimed at ensuring that there is an annual report to Parliament so that we can see the statistics, the number of people affected and the cost involved. It is said that this bill could affect 150,000 people, but no one knows the numbers.”
“Madam Speaker, we know that there is a deadline for passing this bill, and if it is not met, the ruling of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice will take effect. Has my colleague looked into what will happen if the bill is not passed and the court ruling takes effect?”
“Madam Speaker, I would like to remind the House that some of us worked collaboratively in committee to propose obvious amendments to Bill C-3 . I know that the Conservatives and the Bloc Québécois worked on these amendments so that the bill would include a language requirement, so that people would have to be able express themselves in French, particularly in Quebec, or in both languages. It is important that people pass a citizenship knowledge test and undergo security screening. Why were those three amendments so important? How does my colleague explain the fact that the Liberals and the NDP rejected those three obvious amendments?”
“Mr. Speaker, yes, it would be good to know that. Will it be 150,000 people? Will it be less or more? Evidently, the number of people affected has a financial impact. There needs to be accountability. As parliamentarians, we have the right to know and we should get an annual update. That would be critically important. There is a reason this amendment was proposed. This confirms to me that, unfortunately, accountability to Parliament is not the Liberals' strong suit. They are not transparent. They do not show respect for democracy and the mandates they have received. Accountability to Parliament should be a given. I sincerely hope that we will be able to get this annual report and find out the exact number of new citizens and the financial impact this will have. It is important.”
“Mr. Speaker, I cannot speak for the Liberals and say why they voted against that. I would like to remind the House that naturalized citizens are subject to security screenings. Those requirements are already in place. Why should the two groups be treated differently? Why should these applicants not also have to undergo security screenings? There is a reason why these amendments were put forward. Someone should ask the Liberals that question. It is hard to understand their position. Security is a crucial and important issue. Security screening, language testing and knowledge of citizenship are important issues that should have been brought before the House and voted on.”
“Mr. Speaker, if I understand my colleague's question correctly, he is saying that the amendments put forward by the Bloc Québécois and the Conservatives were actually crucial. All we wanted was for applicants to undergo a security test and be able to speak our language. We asked for accountability to Parliament. I think the proposed amendments absolutely respected democracy. I would like to ask my colleague a question. Why undo the work that was done in committee? Everyone knows the Bloc Québécois is rigorous when it comes to correcting deficiencies, so why undo what was done in committee? That is what we are having a hard time understanding.”
“In conclusion, I would like to say that, aside from everything the bill could change, this situation shows that the Liberals are not mindful of the minority mandate they received for a third time in the last election, nor do they respect the work done in committee. The committee heard from witnesses, and there were discussions and negotiations among MPs. The Conservatives and the Bloc worked hard on amendments to fix the flaws in this bill, but all that work was ultimately undone by the NDP and the Liberals. What a blatant lack of respect. I want to acknowledge the work my colleague from Lac-Saint-Jean did on this file. This is a minority government, and it should take that into account. Passing laws on closure and disregarding the work done in committee should not happen in this democratic institution.”
“Among members of the second generation, it increased from 11% to 16% for that age group, according to Statistics Québec. In 2021, Statistics Quebec also reported that immigrant women accounted for 14.9% of all women in Quebec, excluding non-permanent residents. As I was saying, a significant number of seniors could be affected by the old citizenship rules, including the parents and grandparents of the individuals concerned. Staying with Quebec, it is estimated that nearly 10% of Quebeckers have at least one second-generation foreign-born parent, and nearly 10% of Quebeckers are second-generation immigrants, according to New Canadian Media. This is a serious topic.”
“We know that 91.2% of the Canadian population already has citizenship, that 50.6% are women, and that gender equity with regard to citizenship remains essential. As well, 19.5% of the population is 65 or older. Many seniors have been affected by the old laws and exclusions. As the Bloc Québécois critic for seniors, I have heard about some cases that deeply concern me. All of this has reduced naturalization rates, which were 57.5% for immigrants admitted between 2011 and 2015, down from 68.5% between 2006 and 2010. New citizens tend to integrate well: 93% are filing taxes in Canada 10 years after landing. In Quebec, the percentage of first-generation individuals born outside of Canada has grown among young people, climbing from 9% to 18% in the 15- to 24-year-old age group.”
“His astute demonstration that this problem affected many Canadians, such as Roméo Dallaire, without them even knowing it, forced Parliament to take serious action on this issue. The bill aims to remedy the status of the following individuals: Canadian women who lost their citizenship before 1947 upon marrying a non-Canadian; individuals born between 1977 and 1981 who lost their citizenship because they did not renew it by age 28; and children adopted abroad whose Canadian parent died before the adoption. It would fix situations such as these. I will conclude my speech by presenting some data. We will also assess the scope of this bill. My colleague from Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères mentioned that this reform would affect 150,000 people over five years. The estimated cost is $20.8 million, which is not insignificant.”
“This bill also seeks to correct absurd situations, as I mentioned earlier, where a child born abroad to Canadian parents cannot obtain citizenship. Take the case of Jean-François as an example. His father was born abroad, and he himself was born abroad while his father was completing his doctorate in the United States. Even though he returned to Quebec when he was three months old, and even though he grew up here and spent his entire life in Quebec, his daughter was not automatically granted citizenship. The spark that ignited this whole debate came from Don Chapman, a former airline pilot who worked for United Airlines and whose story attracted public attention. Chapman discovered that his citizenship had been revoked when his father emigrated to the United States.”
“They also deal with the security risk people might pose. That is essential. The same requirements apply to other naturalized citizens. They are requirements, and we want to have the same rules for everyone. In a nutshell, that is what we are asking for. (1115) We also want accountability through an annual report to Parliament on the number of citizenships that are granted. We have the right to get a report and to know where we stand. We want these measures to ensure that applicants have a real connection to Canada, as required by the court. We need to ensure that this is the case. We are concerned that the new amendments proposed by the NDP and the Liberals will water down this bill and undermine the essential amendments that we worked on in committee with the Conservatives.”
“Those amendments sought to eliminate the requirement that the 1,095 days of residence take place within a five-year period, abolish the tests for adult applicants, and remove the obligation to report to Parliament. These are important matters. They are not trivial. In contrast, we did support the amendments presented at committee that called for a residence requirement of 1,095 days in Canada during the five years preceding the child's birth. We also supported the amendment that established a language test, a citizenship knowledge test and a security assessment for applicants 18 years of age and over. The Conservative members and my Bloc Québécois colleague, who rose to speak just before I did, told us in their speeches how important these amendments are. They deal with language, culture and citizenship knowledge.”
“Now we have to hurry due to this court ruling and the fact that this matter has unfortunately been dragging on for some time. The goal is to make the right to citizenship fair, consistent and inclusive. It is true that the current law creates some bizarre situations. I am going to begin by talking about the Bloc Québécois's position and the amendments that were proposed in committee. Next, I will talk about what the bill fixes, and I will close with a few statistics. For now, the Bloc Québécois is reserving judgment. We are going to wait and see how things play out. We know there are negotiations going on. We are a bit disappointed about what happened, and we are asking that the work done at committee be respected. The amendments were rejected at report stage. We opposed the amendments from the government, which teamed up with the NDP.”
“That said, today we are talking about Bill C-3 , which corrects a historical injustice in the Citizenship Act in response to a December 2023 ruling by the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, which found that the first-generation limit on citizenship is unconstitutional. This limit was put in place by the Conservatives in 2009. Now we are in a bit of a bind, because if we do not take action, the court's ruling is going to apply instead of Bill C‑3. Could that open the door even wider? We do not know, but we want to know. That is why we are debating Bill C‑3 in the House today. We also know that this issue has been dragging on for years. Bill C-71 and Bill S-245 were introduced to address citizenship. An election was called and the bill died on the Order Paper.”
“I would like to salute the members of that organization this morning as they prepare to present their intercultural recital on Saturday, which is returning after a forced hiatus because of the pandemic. This performance is being presented as part of Quebec's week of intercultural encounters, which is being held this week, from November 3 to 9, with the theme “Quebec in common”. The goal is to really emphasize encounters and exchanges between Quebeckers of all origins. This is extremely important, and I will be stopping by to say hello to everyone at Verbe Divin Secondary School on Saturday and to take in the cultural richness, beauty and various forms of artistic expression.”
“Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak to Bill C‑3 , An Act to amend the Citizenship Act, 2025, following my colleague from Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, who explained the issue well. This topic interests me because certain places in Quebec have been identified as settlement areas, and Granby is one of them. These are communities located in regions outside major urban centres. The Quebec department is asking people to settle there and discover Quebec culture, which is who we are. Granby is included in these settlement areas, and that is a tremendous asset. One organization in Granby is working very hard to teach immigrants French so that they can take their place in Granby's regional community. It is called SERY.”
“Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Calgary Nose Hill for her speech. She and I participated in a few missions together as members of the Canadian Group of the Inter-Parliamentary Union. During those missions, we tried to explain who we are. I want to go back to the committee's work. In her speech, my colleague talked about language. The Bloc and the Conservatives supported amendments concerning language. What are the consequences of those amendments being rejected? More importantly, immigrants must satisfy a language requirement, so why is that requirement not in this bill? Why were the amendments rejected?”
“Mr. Speaker, we are currently studying this issue of section 810 and minimum sentences at the Standing Committee on the Status of Women. We are conducting a study on this subject. What we are hearing, and what we heard in previous studies is that the use of the Jordan decision must also be regulated with respect to gender-based violence. Earlier, a Conservative member was talking about Cait Alexander, who came to the Standing Committee on the Status of Women and talked about her experience as a victim and survivor of domestic violence. She was calling for the Jordan decision to be regulated because, as things stand, some criminals' cases are thrown out because of delays. How could the Jordan decision be better regulated to meet the needs of victims and survivors in cases of sexual offences and murder?”
“Mr. Speaker, the bill talks about giving “primary consideration to denunciation and deterrence of repeat...offences”, particularly in the case of organized crime. Has my colleague had a chance to look into that? The Bloc Québécois has proposed measures that we think would be much more effective in addressing organized crime. They include cutting off their financial resources and creating a registry of these criminal organizations. What does my colleague think about that?”
“Mr. Speaker, my colleague and I are especially concerned about human trafficking. We are all on the All-Party Parliamentary Group to End Modern Slavery and Human Trafficking. Bill C‑14 contains a provision to establish a reverse onus, particularly for some offences related to human trafficking or human smuggling. Will this new provision really bring about significant changes to deal with this scourge, which may need to be addressed in a much broader manner?”
“Yesterday, the witnesses all told us about the criminalization of coercive control, a subject that is even more important than what we are discussing today. Survivors and victims are calling for this. What does my colleague think about that?”
“Mr. Speaker, the Standing Committee on the Status of Women is currently studying a motion that I moved because I was worried and wanted to know whether the justice system is currently responding to the concerns of victims and survivors of violence. In particular, I proposed a study to review section 810 of the Criminal Code. Working with the Conservatives, we finally managed to get another study added to the agenda on bail and sentencing. My colleague and I worked together on this study that is now before the committee. That said, I want to talk to my colleague about another matter. The Bloc Québécois does indeed want to study this issue in committee. As I said, we recently introduced a motion in the Standing Committee on the Status of Women.”
“I would like to offer my sincere congratulations to the Haute‑Yamaska regional business support centre for its 40 years of dedication to our entrepreneurs. They are a pillar of prosperity in Haute‑Yamaska. I hope they can keep this momentum going for years to come because, ultimately, our success depends on our people.”
“Mr. Speaker, the Haute‑Yamaska regional business support centre, known as the CAE, recently celebrated its 40th anniversary. This festive and unifying event successfully highlighted four decades of contributing to the region's economic development. Since 1985, the CAE has been a crucial partner in promoting the local economy by vigorously supporting, financing and helping businesses in the region. The Haute-Yamaska region is a major economic driver of Quebec in large part because of the dynamic team at the CAE. I would like to give a special mention to the executive director, Isabelle Brochu, who has helped the CAE grow over the years. I had the pleasure of talking with her about an interest we share, namely women entrepreneurship. We can be proud of the entrepreneurial ecosystem of the region.”
“Mr. Speaker, there are pork producers in my riding too, and we are following their situation very closely. The riding of Shefford includes a number of supply-managed sectors. I also come from a rural area that needs additional protections. It is true that we voted on a bill in the House to ensure that supply management is fully protected. Bill C-228 , which was introduced by the Bloc Québécois, seeks to establish a framework for thoroughly reviewing international agreements to ensure that, in future negotiations, there are no concessions, particularly when it comes to supply management. Is it not essential for Parliament to be able to monitor the progress of these international agreements, while fully respecting the democratic process?”
“This helps illustrate the real environment of children after separation and supports the need for the court to have reliable tools, including for detecting alienation and deciding what is in the best interests of the child. In conclusion, Bill C‑223 makes significant advances in terms of family safety. However, the fight against domestic violence must not be used as a pretext to gloss over legitimate psychological realities. The Bloc Québécois will act in a rigorous, open and cautious manner to protect children and prevent abuses. We firmly believe in this approach. In closing, I would like to reiterate that, in Quebec, family law must belong to Quebeckers.”
“An online estimate showed that 11% to 15% of divorces in Canada involve significant parental alienation. According to the Canadian Equal Parenting Council, one study reported that the long-term effects of alienating behaviours include anxiety disorders, depression, personality disorders and post-traumatic stress disorder in adults. This shows that parental alienation is real, that it has serious consequences and that it cannot legitimately be excluded from all legislative debate. Regarding child custody after separation, according to the Department of Justice, court data revealed that in 62.2% of cases, the child resided primarily with the mother. In 9.4% of cases, the child resided with the father. In 21.3% of cases, the child was in shared custody 40% of the time or more.”
“According to the Department of Justice, a review of court files revealed that domestic violence was mentioned in 8% of divorce cases. These data support the idea that domestic violence is prevalent in divorce and separation contexts and that assessing and taking this violence into account is justified. I am now going to share a few statistics on parental alienation and alienating behaviours. According to the Canadian child welfare research portal, one Quebec study involving 30 shelters found that 45% of accusations or threatened accusations of parental alienation over the one-year study period comprised almost all of the accusations made in the past five years, and that 86.7% of service providers said that this phenomenon was impacting their practice.”
“Third, I would like to present some useful statistics to inform the discussion about children exposed to their parents' separation or divorce. According to Statistics Canada, 18% of children aged 1 to 17 in Canada, or 1,185,700 children, have experienced their parents' separation or divorce. In Quebec, it was 23%. This illustrates the scale of the phenomenon and justifies the importance of a strong legislative framework to protect children. I will now present statistics on domestic violence, children, and family justice. According to police data from the Government of Canada, in 2019, 22,299 children and youth were victims of family violence. Of those children, 60% were girls. According to Statistics Canada, in 2015, 16% of victims of violent crimes were children and adolescents, and 30% of those crimes were committed by a family member.”
“We want to propose amendments that genuinely protect children during acrimonious divorces and that guarantee their well-being without weakening family law. However, we firmly reject the idea that parental alienation is an invention used by violent men. We are convinced that it is more complicated than that. We also reject the idea that the justice system is incapable of doing the right thing. Instead, the Bloc Québécois reaffirms its trust in Quebec courts and family professionals. We reiterate our commitment to defending genuine equality before the law, whatever people's gender. We also want to oppose any attempt to politicize psychology as it applies to legal proceedings. We want to do this work seriously in committee with other experts.”
“The Bloc is calling for Quebec to have control over marriage and divorce so that there is a consistent system that is adapted to our reality. In addition, it would not be a two-tiered system. (1710) We recognize that there are challenges. As I said earlier, we in the Bloc Québécois would have liked a study to be done on the issue of parental alienation. Instead, it was included in a different study, and even my colleague recognized earlier that we could have heard from experts on the subject. A study on the subject could have enhanced our discussions. We support the bill being sent to committee for further study. We are not throwing out the baby with the bathwater. We want to have experts, psychologists, legal experts and social workers come and testify.”
“This distinction is anachronistic and unnecessarily complex. Quebec already has a strong civil law tradition, a modern and humane approach to family law as well as the unified family tribunal, which is new this year. What is the unified family tribunal? The justice minister, Simon Jolin-Barrette, created the unified family tribunal. Since October 10, 2025, civil union applications have been heard by the unified family tribunal, which is part of the Court of Quebec. The tribunal can hear and rule on various cases, which illustrates the Quebec government's expertise in and attention to this type of civil litigation. These courts can therefore already rule on all aspects of a separation, such as custody, alimony and parental authority—just not divorce.”
“By removing all references to parental alienation, the bill prevents courts from examining a well-documented psychological reality, weakens the balance between parental rights and risks further judicializing family conflicts. This could leave some children without protection against manipulative behaviour. The 2021 legislation already provides a very comprehensive framework for family violence. Bill C‑223 therefore risks being redundant and unbalanced. Imposing a legal obligation to assess violence in every divorce case could also unnecessarily burden the courts. Second, there truly is a Quebec perspective. Family law in Quebec is comprehensive and autonomous. Furthermore, family law falls under Quebec jurisdiction, except for divorce, which has been a federal jurisdiction since 1867.”
“Hubert Van Gijseghem and Jérôme Harrisson acknowledge the complexity of the diagnosis, but confirm its clinical reality. Alienating behaviours are not gender-specific. Both men and women can engage in them. Removing this notion amounts to denying the experiences of many parents and children in Quebec. In practice, courts already require solid evidence and professional assessments before recognizing a case of alienation. There is therefore no systemic abuse. I also know that my colleague from Beauharnois—Salaberry—Soulanges—Huntingdon will be able to talk about this a little later. I would now like to discuss the risks of Bill C‑223.”
“However, the bill goes too far in certain respects, particularly in seeking to dismiss the concept of parental alienation. This approach risks weakening the tools available to courts to protect children in cases of parental manipulation. Parental alienation is a recognized concept. Despite what was said by some members of the Standing Committee on the Status of Women during the study on the criminalization of coercive control, parental alienation is not an ideological invention, but a psychological phenomenon observed and documented by research and practice. According to a definition recognized by the Parental Alienation Study Group, parental alienation occurs when a child forms a strong alliance with one parent and rejects the other without valid reason. Experts such as Dr.”
“Its key measures are the requirement for lawyers to assess the risk of violence before acting on a spouse's behalf; the possibility for the court to directly consult with children to find out their views; the prohibition on the court to take into account allegations of parental alienation, unless it occurs in the context of family violence; and a desire to avoid certain myths or stereotypes about violence ending after a separation. I will elaborate further on the bill and speak to what is happening in Quebec. I will then present some statistics. First, the intention is commendable, but it is a problematic legislative vehicle. The Bloc Québécois shares the goal of better protecting children and preventing domestic violence, of course.”