Justice committee paralysis signals rocky road for 2026
The 45th Canadian Parliament’s Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights has gotten very little done, and its paralysis as 2025 ends is a clear sign of the dysfunction Canadians can expect.
The 45th Canadian Parliament’s Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights has gotten very little done, and its paralysis as 2025 ends is a clear sign of the dysfunction Canadians can expect from Ottawa in 2026.
Reconvened with new members after the 2025 federal election delivered a minority Liberal government, the justice committee was tasked with addressing pressing issues like bail reform and sentencing—key pledges from both major parties.
Instead, proceedings have been marked by partisan jabs, accusations, filibusters, and procedural tactics that have stalled legislation and delayed promised reforms.
The 45th Parliament opened its first session in spring 2025 with high expectations for progress on bail and sentencing.
But the justice committee’s initial meeting lasted under 30 minutes, ending abruptly on a Liberal motion to adjourn.
“Another important point on group solidarity: potentially hangriness,” committee chair Marc Miller quipped before addressing priorities like travel expenses and raising hands for motions.
About 10 minutes in, Liberal MP James Maloney and Conservative MP Larry Brock both sought recognition to introduce motions. Miller called on Maloney first.
“I suggest that as there are no other orders of business, I motion to adjourn,” Maloney said.
As reported on by True North at the time, the meeting opened uneventfully with the election of Liberal MP Marc Miller as chair and Conservative MP Larry Brock and Bloc Québécois MP Rhéal Éloi Fortin as vice-chairs.
But the calm lasted barely minutes.
As soon as the committee turned to adopt its standard set of routine motions — normally a brief and forgettable housekeeping step — Brock introduced a motion that immediately triggered procedural blowback from Liberal and Bloc members.
What followed was an extended exchange over whether the motion was in order, whether it could interrupt the business before the committee, and whether members were even permitted to debate it under House rules.
The dispute spiralled into a chorus of overlapping interventions. MPs accused one another, politely but pointedly, of misreading procedure; the chair urged members repeatedly to exercise restraint and relevance; and the committee ground itself into a procedural cul-de-sac early into the parliamentary session.
“We’re experiencing early-onset grandstanding, I see,” Maloney sighed.
Within minutes, Liberal members resorted to one of the few procedural tools capable of halting the impasse: a motion to adjourn.
With Conservative members of the committee representing a minority, the adjournment motion quickly passed and abruptly terminated the meeting before any substantive business could begin.
That inaugural clash set the tone for what would become a pattern: a justice committee marked by stop-and-start proceedings, escalating mistrust, and a tendency for the smallest procedural matter to detonate into full-blown, and often entertaining, standoffs.
By the fourth meeting—only the third publicly viewable—a convicted murderer testified as a bail reform expert at a Liberal’s request, without disclosing her history, as reported by True North.
Liberal and Bloc members have since prioritized Bill C-9, the Combatting Hate Act, stalling other work.
Tabled September 19 by Justice Minister Sean Fraser, the bill aims to strengthen hate propaganda laws, create offences for intimidating religious or cultural sites, and boost hate crime penalties—goals that sound reasonable on the surface.
But details have sparked controversy, drawing criticism from Conservatives, civil liberties groups, constitutional lawyers, faith organizations, and free-speech advocates.
Dysfunction escalated during clause-by-clause review when then-chair Miller suggested some Bible verses amount to hate speech.
“In Leviticus, Deuteronomy, Romans—there’s other passages—there is clear hatred towards, for example, homosexuals,” Miller said. “Clearly there are situations in these texts where these statements are hateful. They should not be used to invoke or be a defense.”
His remarks, justifying removal of the “good faith” religious defense under Section 319(3)(b) of the Criminal Code, sparked outrage from Conservative members and Christian groups—but drew a nod from the committee’s lone Bloc member.
Outside the committee, Bloc MP Martin Champoux backed the change, citing a hypothetical pastor “hatefully” interpreting the Bible to urge violence against homosexuals.
In response, the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops voiced deep concern in a December 4 letter to Prime Minister Mark Carney, warning that axing the exemption could undermine religious freedom, expression, and public discourse.
The provision has safeguarded Canadians of all faiths for decades, they said.
Nearly half the committee seemed sympathetic, with Conservatives displaying holy books at later meetings in silent protest.
In a rare bipartisan moment, Conservative MP Andrew Lawton pushed for reinstating mandatory minimum sentences for child sexual abuse material possession, after the Supreme Court struck them down.
“We understand that numerous figures in this country, including provincial premiers, have called on the federal government to invoke the notwithstanding clause and reinstitute mandatory minimum sentences for those who traffic in and view child sexual exploitation and abuse material,” Lawton said.
A December 2 committee report, signed by outgoing chair Miller, urged the government to do so—potentially via the notwithstanding clause.
It remains the committee’s only published report.
Miller was soon replaced as chair by Maloney upon his appointment as Minister of Culture and Heritage.
Under Maloney, December meetings have continued the dysfunction, including an eight-hour marathon plagued by loud yelling, accusations, and cross-party filibusters, with no signs of the group righting the ship heading into the new year.