SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

Member of Parliament

Rhéal Éloi Fortin

  • Member of Parliament
  • Member of Parliament
  • Bloc Québécois
  • Rivière-du-Nord
  • Quebec
  • Voting Attendance: 68%
  • Expenses Last Quarter: $105,330.31

  • Government Page
Context: House Hansard - 265 - Dec/11/23
Mr. Rhéal Éloi Fortin (Rivière-du-Nord, BQ)
  • Dec/11/23 5:45:12 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I asked myself the same question as my NDP colleague. Why are we debating this motion today? Why not sooner? There seems to be unanimous consent, but I will not repeat the same questions. I have some concerns because when we talk about the Taliban, we know that it is already a listed terrorist organization. There is a great deal of distrust—in Quebec in any case, and I am sure it is the same across Canada—for this organization or this group of people who do not show much interest in human rights, especially when we talk about women's rights. This concerns us a lot. We saw here in Parliament that there have already been numerous debates over the years on the right to abortion. No one wants to reopen that debate, but there are times when some of our colleagues suggest that it could be up for debate in the future. That concerns us. I would like to know whether my colleague thinks that the situation in Canada, with this type of debate on upholding human rights, on a woman's right to an abortion and women's presence in society, could lead to extreme positions that, while not as serious as what we see in Afghanistan, could be similar to the types of speeches we might see there. What are his thoughts on this?
232 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 212 - Jun/13/23
Mr. Rhéal Éloi Fortin (Rivière-du-Nord, BQ)
  • Jun/13/23 5:48:55 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, violence is a devastating scourge on our society. Regardless of the victim or the circumstances, it is unacceptable. Men using violence to abuse a woman is cowardly and ugly. It is unacceptable. Using violence against children is just as cowardly, just as ugly, and just as unacceptable. Violence against a pregnant woman is also ugly and cowardly. It is unacceptable. It is abhorrent. We agree on that, and no one will ever hear me trying to justify such horrible acts in the House. I do not think I could, even if I tried. I would lack all credibility. Consequently, I imagine I will be asked to justify our position, because yes, the Bloc Québécois will be voting against this bill. The simple explanation is that the Bloc Québécois opposes any attempt to undermine women's rights to decide for themselves. Let us not kid ourselves: What we are talking about today is the right to abortion. It is at the heart of an issue that we all thought had been settled a long time ago. We feel that today's debates on this subject are out of date and I would even say, with all due respect, out of place. Is it worth reviewing how far Quebec and Canadian women have come in this regard? Abortion was illegal in Canada until 1969, but that was followed by an almost equally dark period, when the right to abortion was fraught with conditions, rules and the need for advance authorization. In order to perform an abortion, the authorized hospitals had to first obtain the approval of a committee. The therapeutic abortion committee had to be made up of at least three doctors, none of whom could be doctors who performed abortions. I will not go so far as to say they were anti-choice, but I think we can all agree that they were certainly not the most pro-choice doctors. Dr. Morgentaler's fight kept our courts and media busy for many decades. In the end, he was sentenced to 10 months in prison for performing illegal abortions after the Supreme Court of Canada denied his appeal in 1975. Then came the 1982 Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which was still not enough to prevent him from being taken to court again in 1983, along with two of his fellow doctors, for performing abortions in Toronto. At that time, the court ruled that the provisions of the Criminal Code on abortion infringed on a woman's right to security of the person. The Criminal Code provisions were struck down and they still have not been replaced. As of that moment, abortion was not longer prohibited in Quebec and Canada. The Supreme Court also reiterated in 1993 that the provinces could not restrict the right to abortion to only public hospitals. Here we have a bill that, perversely, I would say with all due respect, would have us go along with a degree of legal right for the fetus; indirectly, some might say, but still. As the Criminal Code provides and the courts have recognized, acts of violence against a pregnant woman are unacceptable and an aggravating factor that can be considered by the court during sentencing. We agree with that. As I said at the outset, it is unacceptable, it is heinous, and it must be severely punished. Nevertheless, that does not mean my Conservative colleague's proposed provisions are acceptable. As we saw in R. v S.W. in 2021 in the Court of Quebec, and as correctly laid out by professor Lucie Lemonde from the Université du Québec à Montréal in her work entitled Les menaces au droit à l'avortement et à l'autonomie des femmes enceintes, “the current provisions of the Criminal Code are sufficient to achieve the goal of more severely punishing an assault on a pregnant woman”. The Hon. Michel Doyon, then president of the Bar of Quebec, pointed this out himself to the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights in his letter dated May 30, 2008. Indeed, paragraph 718.2(a) of the Criminal Code already provides for this important function in subparagraph (iii.1). It says: 718.2 A court that imposes a sentence shall also take into consideration the following principles: (a) a sentence should be increased or reduced to account for any relevant aggravating or mitigating circumstances relating to the offence or the offender, and, without limiting the generality of the foregoing, ... (iii.1) evidence that the offence had a significant impact on the victim, considering their age and other personal circumstances, including their health and financial situation As I was saying earlier, the Quebec court had to rule on a case involving a violent man who abused his wife when she was pregnant and even after she had children. Without relating all the facts submitted as evidence, the judge seized with the case rightly ruled that section 718.2 allowed for a harsher sentence for a man who abuses his pregnant wife. Once again, the Hon. Michel Doyon handed down a similar ruling in 2008, and Professor Lemonde reiterated these facts in her article that I quoted earlier. It seems to me that they would like us to swallow a pretty big and, above all, dangerous lie. Like my party, I am a strong advocate for women's rights to autonomy and the protection of their security and safety, which includes the right to abortion. We do stand in strong solidarity against all forms of violence. With respect to the amendments to the Criminal Code, we have reiterated our position many times in the House. I have no pity for those who commit crimes with firearms, among other things, and I believe that is the case for my colleagues as well. These violent crimes must be severely punished. The House must pass tough Criminal Code provisions to fight organized crime and combat illegal arms trafficking. We are as much against violence as we are against attacks on a woman's right to reasonable and safe abortion options within our health care systems. No matter what political party we belong to, we owe it to ourselves to be particularly careful with our legislative power when dealing with subjects as sensitive as this that could potentially endanger the legal advances made in recent years—not so long ago, actually—for women's rights.
1085 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border