Transcription
Good evening. I'm Rod Curts. Welcome to Bridge City News special report. Tonight we look at religious freedom in Canada. There are many who would say it is under attack. And with new hate speech legislation that potentially could impact what people of faith say in the public square, it has raised debate among Christians as to how we should address culture and engage in what is an increasingly polarized political landscape. We're going to look into that tonight.
But we start with Bill C9. In the government's new hate speech legislation, the Bloc Quebecois proposed an amendment that would remove the religious exemption for sincerely held religious beliefs. Meaning potentially if something or if someone doesn't like what you share in terms of a biblical view in the public square that could be deemed hate speech and you could be charged. Here to discuss where this all stands is Conservative MP Andrew Lton. Andrew, thanks for joining us.
>> Hey, thanks for having me. It's good to be with you.
>> So last week C9 was back before the Justice Commons Justice Committee for further study. What transpired in this latest round of study?
So, we never actually got to study it last week. Uh the the meeting we were supposed to have on Monday was cancelled uh just because their parties were were trying to find a way forward on what's become a very divisive and polarizing bill. Uh we were set to pick it back up on Wednesday and then the uh the horrific events in in Tumbler Ridge just caused all parliamentary business to be put on hold. So, as it stands now, this is actually a break week for parliamentarians. MPs are back in their ridings. But next week uh we are expecting the justice committee to be reconvened and bill C9 to be uh once again up for discussion. And I I just want to say that there were issues with the bill from the get-go about the uh redefinition of hate, the idea of lowering the threshold at which speech can become criminalized. Uh some other changes as well that this law would make to the criminal code. But this removal of the religious defense that you mentioned, this was a Bloc Quebecois amendment that the Liberal MPs on the committee supported. So that amendment is now part of the legislation. And practically what it means is that if this bill passes, you will remove this longstanding protection for sincerely held religious beliefs and citation of religious texts that has previously protected you from prosecution under willfully promoting hate. And uh when you have this removal of this protection and combining this with the fact that there's now going to be a new definition of hate with a lower threshold, there are very serious concerns that people who raise religious or theological beliefs, who cite religious texts that might come into areas of contentiousness and areas of debate in society and even among faith, that you will now be attracting the eye of overzealous prosecution.
When this whole debate started, did you know that you had become what I would call the tip of the spear, having been on the front end of this debate? What's that been like for you?
>> It's an interesting question. I mean, when I when I spoke in my maiden speech as a member of parliament, I was elected last April. I've only been there about 10 months. I I said that I came to Ottawa to make Canada a freer country. And I was motivated to get into politics in part because of some of these attacks we've seen in recent years on freedom of expression. I never thought I would have something like this come up so quickly and so specifically tied to this pledge that I made. So in a lot of ways I had no other choice but to take this up. And I'm very grateful to be working with a great team that's been standing up across the country for religious freedom. This is an important issue and it isn't just for Christians. It's religious freedom for one is religious freedom for all. You cannot protect any community from hate if you're targeting them with the potential for prosecution for expressing their religious beliefs. And and that's why we've been trying to unite Canadians of faith and all Canadians against what Bill C9 is doing.
>> You held a series of town hall meetings before Parliament resumed sitting in late January. What did you hear from Canadians at those gatherings?
Well, you know, the one thing that I I heard, I'll break it into two categories because at the outset, people of faith were saying, "Listen, this doesn't affect us. We don't preach hate. Our religion is about love." And when you talk about the bill itself and what it says, people start to realize that it's not about what you know your faith to be and what you know your scriptures to be saying. It's about how bad actors will choose to misrepresent and malign your faith. How often have we seen in a social media argument someone saying this is hateful or that's hateful? We're trying to make sure that we don't have arbitrary lines being drawn when a free society needs to have a range of views, even ones that might be very hurtful or harmful to us. And that includes the the freedom to criticize religion. The the other thing I'll share is that people were very personally targeted by comments made in October by Mark Miller who at the time was the chair of the justice committee and he said that there are some verses of scripture that in his words have quote clear hatred and he singled out Leviticus, Deuteronomy and Romans. He said there's clear hatred in those books and prosecutors should be able to press charges again his exact words if you quote these scriptures. So we are not speculating when we wonder how people are going to use this new power the government is granting itself when a member of the cabinet which he now is is saying that some verses of scripture should be inherently criminal to quote.
Now since you brought up Mark Miller let's go there. He is now the Culture Minister. Uh and last week during a Commons Standing Committee on Finance meeting you decided to bring up C9 with him. Uh I I won't I won't play the clip, but basically you listed a bunch of religious organizations and bodies in this country who have responded to C9 and this particular religious exemption and you listed the different organizations that have come out to say this is not right. Just maybe recap that for us and what his response was.
>> Yeah. So, so the minister was appearing before the finance committee to testify broadly about priorities for his portfolio and I asked him as the minister of Canadian identity and culture if he believes that religion is an integral part of Canadian identity and culture and and to his credit he said yes. But how then can he justify taking aim at religious belief and religious expression the way he has? And I I mentioned to him all of these different groups that have lined up in the course of C9's deliberations representing, you know, the Conference of Canadian Catholic Bishops, the Anglican Church of Canada, the United Church of Canada, the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada, the Rabbinical Council of Toronto, the National Council of Canadian Muslims, various Hindu Buddhist Organizations. We've got pretty much every faith represented in the list of groups that are either denouncing in whole or in part Bill C9. And I'm saying, what is it that you think you know better about the value and place of religion in society in Canada than all of these groups that are directly involved in that?
>> Yeah. And his response to that was, well, you know, I'm not a I think he said ministers can be good guides, but he was in his words, I think he kind of was talking about following his own heart and his own beliefs as a Protestant and that he felt that, you know, again, he could still support that kind of prosecution. and I believe he was the one that mentioned Leviticus. So, I just thought that was an interesting exchange.
Why did you bring it up in a finance committee meeting?
>> Well, that's where he was testifying. Uh I mean, look, it it was at the risk of getting too technical, it was part of a discussion of the the budget implementation act, which is a 600-page bill that covers basically the entirety of what every government department is doing. So there's a general convention that when a minister is testifying on the budget implementation act, you have a wide latitude of what you talk to them about about them in their file. That that's the why.
Let's talk a little bit about when this was paused, when we had that first pause on the study of C9 and there were a lot of organizations that were quite excited about the pause. Was that pushback from people, the letter-writing campaigns and all the different things that were happening. Do you think that played a part in the pause?
There have been a couple of pauses. So, I'll say first and foremost, the Liberals originally wanted to ram this thing through by December. And we were were, you know, saying, listen, this is like you you can't just spring something like this on faith communities in Canada. We never had the opportunity to study the removal of the religious defense. It was coming about really quickly. So, we were able to buy some time to kick it to after the holidays. And when we came back, you know, we had taken the time to consult with faith groups, people that were not consulted by the government as part of the drafting of Bill C9. And uh there was a huge pressure campaign. I know Fatimine Gesi, a Christian broadcaster, had organized a group that made, I believe, 45,000 phone calls uh by this point to constituency offices and Parliament Hill offices of Liberal members of Parliament. Uh people were writing emails and letters. I was getting them as well, even from people not knowing that I was leading the charge on this issue, but just knew, hey, he's an MP on the justice committee. Let's tell him what we think. And I know that was a big part of it. I we had some MPs that were were in good faith engaging with people. Uh there have been other MPs, uh one particular prominent Muslim MP from Scarborough, a Liberal, Salma Zahid, who had a town hall to hear her community's concerns about this, and I think she's actually been very receptive and responsive to that. So I I think the Liberals are realizing that there is a lot of division on this and [snorts] then there was also the fact that the justice committee should be dealing with criminal justice priorities like bail reform. So we were saying we have this bail bill why don't you just let us set aside C9 focus on this important issue for which there's far more consensus. They did that. That only bought us two weeks and they were insistent that C9 had to come back. So, at this point, again, the Liberals still could do the right thing and either pull this bill entirely or at the very least kick it down the road so we can deal with more pressing concerns. But really, the the Liberal and Bloc Quebecois members combined have the votes to pass it. And that's the crucial thing here. So, the only way this doesn't get passed is if the Liberals decide to pull it. And that's only going to come from public pressure.
So, no matter what happens with C9, I think faith groups in this country are realizing the landscape is changing. What's your advice to them?
>> Well, I I think don't wait until it's a crisis to get involved. Uh, you know, one of the big frustrations I've had when I've been meeting with faith leaders around the country is this this unwillingness to engage in the political process. And I I say to people, it's not about being partisan. It's not about picking a team. It's about understanding when you have skin in the game as faith leaders and as faith communities. And I'll say first and foremost that faith leaders provide so much to our society. It isn't just about preaching. But you think of all the ministries that churches and mosques and synagogues do in their communities from food programs from you know hearing from people and providing remedies to really challenging social issues that government can't or or won't address. And we only have what faith groups are doing in this country because they have the freedom to exist and because they are rooted in their religious beliefs. So if you infringe on their beliefs, you don't get the benefits, the philanthropic benefits as a community and as a society that we get. And you know there there have been signs of things like this coming. You know, for example, when two 123 churches were burned or vandalized in the last 5 years, Justin Trudeau was asked about it and he said it was quote understandable unquote. That is not standing in solidarity with people of faith. Uh we had in 2024 an amendment that was or a recommendation rather adopted by the Justice the Finance Committee by Liberal and New Democrat members recommending the government strip charitable status away from houses of worship. again not recognizing the good they provide in society. A few years back the Canada Summer Jobs Program controversy. The government at one point threatened and ultimately backed off of removing eligibility for the Canada Summer Jobs Program unless organizations checked off a values attestation that basically would have meant um undermining or or uh you know revoking rebuking rather uh certain religious beliefs. So there have been signs along the way and I think people of faith need to understand that this is happening and get involved. You are not disqualified from participating in the political process because you are a person of faith.
>> Andrew, appreciate your time. I know you're busy. I appreciate you giving us a few minutes to talk about this today. Thank you.
>> Well, it's an important issue. Thank you for uh shining a light on it.
Andrew Lton is the Conservative MP for the Ontario riding of Elgin—St. Thomas—London South. Coming up, a broader look at our religious freedoms. Just over a week ago, Canadians from across the country gathered at a religious freedom summit in Ottawa. What was the tone of that gathering? Well, we'll find out when our Janette Rocher chats with the executive director of that summit, Jojo Ruba. Coming up right after the break.