Bail and Sentencing Reform Bill

Moved the adoption of the report.

He said: Honourable senators, I rise today to move the adoption of the seventh report of the Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs on Bill C-14, An Act to amend the Criminal Code, the Youth Criminal Justice Act and the National Defence Act (bail and sentencing), as amended by the Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs.

At the outset, I would like to thank Senator Dalphond, the Senate sponsor of the bill, for his thoughtful and diligent work in bringing this important legislation before the Senate. His contributions helped frame the bill’s objectives and the difficult balance it seeks to strike between public safety, constitutional rights, judicial discretion and the practical realities of the justice system.

I would also like to thank Senator Batters, the critic of the bill, for her careful and engaged work throughout this process and for bringing sustained attention to the concerns of victims, families and communities affected by violent and repeat offending. The contributions of these two senators were from different perspectives, but they assisted the Senate and the committee in their consideration of this bill.

Senators, Bill C-14 responds to serious public concerns about violent and repeat offending, bail compliance, intimate partner violence, extortion, auto theft, home invasions, sexual violence and public confidence in the administration of justice. It also engages fundamental criminal justice principles: public safety; the presumption of innocence; reasonable bail; judicial discretion; proportionality; and the overrepresentation of Indigenous Peoples, Black Canadians and other marginalized communities in the criminal justice system.

The committee undertook a thorough and serious study of Bill C-14. Over the course of nine meetings, two of which were dedicated to clause-by-clause consideration, the committee heard from 56 witnesses, including 5 witnesses during clause-by-clause consideration. In total, the committee spent 20 hours examining the bill and received 35 written briefs.

The study of the bill began on March 25, 2026, and clause-by-clause consideration began on May 6, 2026.

During that process, nine amendments were proposed by Senators Prosper, Clement, Simons, Dalphond, Pate, Saint-Germain and Tannas. Four amendments were adopted by the committee, affecting three clauses in total; two subamendments were proposed; and one subamendment was adopted.

This work reflects a serious and collaborative effort by the committee to examine the bill’s public safety objectives, legal architecture and practical consequences.

Honourable senators, at its core, Bill C-14 seeks to strengthen bail and sentencing rules in response to serious and repeat offending. It expands or modifies reverse-onus provisions for certain serious offences, including offences related to violent and organized crime-related auto theft; break and enter of a dwelling-house; trafficking in persons; human smuggling; violent extortion; and assault or sexual assault involving choking, suffocation or strangulation. It also addresses release plans made by accused individuals, outstanding charges, aggravating factors, conditional sentence orders, consecutive sentences, contempt penalties for youth criminal justice record breaches and bail-related data collection.

The committee heard evidence supporting the bill’s public safety objectives. Police representatives, provincial officials, victims’ advocates and others emphasized the need to respond more effectively to the violent repeat offending, bail breaches, extortion, intimate partner violence, home invasions, auto theft and sexual offences we see in the community.

At the same time, other witnesses cautioned that expanding reverse-onus provisions and tightening bail and sentencing rules may increase pressure on courts, contribute to pretrial detention and have disproportionate impacts on Indigenous Peoples, Black Canadians, women, youth, people living in poverty, people with mental health needs and people living in rural, northern and remote communities.

In short, the evidence reflected both a shared concern for public safety and a recognition that criminal justice reform must be precise, constitutional, workable, evidence-based and fair.

The written briefs submitted to the committee reinforced many of these themes. They reflected a wide range of perspectives from legal organizations, civil liberties groups, Indigenous organizations, Black legal advocates, victims’ advocates, police and prosecution representatives, academics and community organizations.

Honourable senators, I would now like to place on the record the summary of the amendments adopted by the committee.

First, regarding sureties, is subclause 23(1.1).

During the study of Bill C-14 in the other place, the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights added a new provision barring an individual who has been convicted of an indictable offence within the previous 10 years from being a surety. This was done in subclause 23(1.1), which effectively adds a new subsection to the Criminal Code, 515(2.11).

The Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs amended this provision to add an exception where the court is satisfied that no other suitable surety is available and that naming the surety is in the interests of the administration of justice. In this case, the court must record its reasons for naming a surety on the record.

The second regards considering overrepresented groups in the criminal justice system. Under section 493.2 of the Criminal Code, when a police officer or a court makes a decision about the release of an accused, they must give particular attention to the circumstances of individuals who are Indigenous, Black or belong to another group that is overrepresented in the criminal justice system. Subsection 515(13.1) of the Code requires a court to include an explanation of how section 493.2 was implemented, and that must be done on the record.

The Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs amended Bill C-14 to further clarify that if no party raises the issue of section 493.2, the court must inquire on the record whether that section applies to the accused before the court. This is a new subclause, 23(12), and it adds a new subsection to the Criminal Code, 515(13.2).

The third regards annual reports.

During the study of Bill C-14 in the other place, the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights added a clause amending the Department of Justice Act to require the Minister of Justice to prepare an annual report on the state of the bail system, clause 58.1. That added clause specifies certain data and analysis that must be included in the report.

The Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs made two principal changes to this clause. First, the committee added the rates of pretrial detention as a data point that must be included in the report. Second, it added a requirement that the Minister of Justice consult with experts in criminal justice data collection and coordinate the collection of data with Statistics Canada.

Fourth, regarding coming into force, is clause 84.

The committee amended clause 84 in Bill C-14 so that clauses 71 and 72 come into force on a day to be fixed by order of the Governor-in-Council, rather than coming into force 30 days after Royal Assent. Clauses 71 and 72 relate to the retention period for investigative records under the Youth Criminal Justice Act and the parties permitted to access them.

Honourable senators, these four amendments reflect the committee’s effort to improve the bill in light of the evidence before it without altering its core public safety objectives.

The surety amendment preserves the concern underlying the House of Commons amendment while restoring a measure of judicial discretion in exceptional circumstances where no other suitable surety is available and the interests of justice support the appointment of a surety.

The amendment concerning section 493.2 helps ensure that the circumstances of Indigenous accused persons, Black accused persons or those persons who are accused and members of other overrepresented groups are not overlooked in bail proceedings.

The annual reporting amendment responds to one of the clearest themes in the committee’s study: the need for better national bail data, including data on pretrial detention, developed with appropriate expertise and in coordination with Statistics Canada.

Certainly, Senator Pate made this an issue of great moment, as the committee was surprised by the lack of data and the clear need to have better data — because you can’t make good policy unless you have good data.

Finally, the coming-into-force amendment recognizes that changes to the Youth Criminal Justice Act records require careful implementation.

Honourable senators, in reviewing the testimony, three themes stand out.

First, there was broad agreement that serious violence, repeat offending, intimate partner violence, extortion, auto theft, home invasions and sexual offences require an effective response.

Second, there was also a clear caution that bail and sentencing reforms must preserve individualized decision making, judicial discretion, proportionality and Charter compliance.

Third, witnesses repeatedly emphasized that implementation matters. Public safety cannot be achieved by legislation alone. It also depends on police, prosecutors, defence counsel, courts, legal aid, bail supervision, victim services, correctional systems, treatment, housing and community supports.

These are not contradictions. They are the realities of criminal justice reform.

Before concluding, I would like to express my sincere appreciation to the members of the committee and to all those who contributed to this study.

I would also like to recognize the senators who participated in the committee’s consideration of this bill, including Senator Batters, Senator Miville-Dechêne, Senator Clement, Senator Kristopher Wells, Senator Oudar, Senator Simons, Senator Tannas, Senator Pate, Senator Saint-Germain, Senator Dhillon, Senator Prosper, Senator Dalphond and others who contributed to the committee’s work.

I would also like to thank the assigned committee staff for their exceptional work: the law clerk Philippe Giguère, analysts Michaela Keenan-Pelletier and Dana Phillips, the administrative assistant Natassia Ephrem and the clerk Vincent Labrosse. Their expertise, diligence and professionalism were essential to the committee’s work.

Honourable senators, Bill C-14 asks Parliament to respond to serious and repeat offending while preserving constitutional rights, judicial discretion, proportionality and fairness. The bill, as amended, reflects careful consideration of those responsibilities. It is not perfect. No legislation is. But the amendments adopted by the committee improve the bill. They preserve discretion where it is needed, strengthen consideration of overrepresented groups, improve data collection and reporting, and allow for more careful implementation of sensitive youth justice provisions.

For these reasons, senators, I invite you to adopt the report of the committee. In addition, I support Bill C-14, as amended by the committee, and I will be voting in favour of the bill in that form at third reading. I invite you to do so as well. Thank you.

Yes.

If so, you will need to request leave for more time because your time has expired.

I ask my colleagues for more time.

Is leave granted, honourable senators?

I don’t have the exact information, but I accept that you probably do. Certainly, the amendments were agreed to by the majority of the members. However, there were a number of votes that were on division.

Also, we did record every vote in the course of the two days of meetings and the five hours of clause-by-clause consideration. I hope that clarifies that. I don’t disagree with your assessment of how it went. Thank you.

Are honourable senators ready for the question?

Is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion?

Some Hon. Senators: Agreed.

An Hon. Senator: On division.

(Motion agreed to, on division, and report adopted.)

Honourable senators, when shall this bill, as amended, be read the third time?

(On motion of Senator Dalphond, bill, as amended, placed on the Orders of the Day for third reading at the next sitting of the Senate.)