SoVote

Bill C-3

44th Parl. 1st Sess.

December 17, 2021

This bill, called Bill C-3, was passed by the Canadian Parliament in December 2021. It makes amendments to both the Criminal Code and the Canada Labour Code. In terms of the Criminal Code, the bill creates new offences related to intimidating individuals in order to impede their access to health services or to interfere with the duties of health professionals. It also adds the commission of offences against a person providing health services or impeding another person's access to health services as aggravating factors for any offence. In regards to the Canada Labour Code, the bill extends the period of leave an employee can take in the event of the death of a child and provides for a leave of absence in the event of the loss of an unborn child. It also modifies provisions related to sick leave, allowing employees to earn and take up to 10 days of medical leave with pay per year. The bill also gives the Governor in Council the authorit

A steelman argument in favor of this act could be as follows: This act is necessary to protect both health professionals and individuals seeking health services. Intimidation and obstruction of access to health services can have detrimental effects on the well-being and safety of patients and healthcare providers. By creating specific offences for intimidating individuals seeking health services and obstructing access to healthcare facilities, this act sends a clear message that such behavior will not be tolerated. It also recognizes the importance of supporting healthcare professionals in carrying out their duties without fear or interference. Additionally, the act extends the period of leave for employees in the event of the death of a child or loss of an unborn child, which acknowledges the need for compassion and understanding during challenging times. By providing employees with the support they require during such difficult circ

A steelman argument opposing this act could be as follows: This Act, although well-intentioned, undermines the principle of free speech and could have unintended consequences. By creating an offence of intimidating a person in order to impede them from obtaining health services or intimidating a health professional in the performance of their duties, this Act could potentially stifle legitimate criticism or protests against certain health services or practices. It could be argued that having robust debates and discussions about health services is crucial for a democratic society. Furthermore, the provision of obstructing or interfering with a person's lawful access to a place at which health services are provided, while subject to a defence of attending for the purpose of obtaining or communicating information, could still potentially limit the ability of individuals to express their dissent or concerns. Additionally, the inclusion