Leadership candidates Andrew Scheer, Brad Trost, Pierre Lemieux, voted against
OTTAWA (CCN)
Transgender Bill C-16, that would add gender identity and expression to the Criminal Code and Canadian Human Rights Act, was passed in the House of Commons Oct. 18 by a 248-40 vote.
Justice Minister Jody Wilson-Raybould introduced the bill in May. It now moves on to committee before returning to the House, possibly with amendments, for a third reading vote. If it passes, it will go to the Senate for final review.
MPs from all parties said they supported the bill in principle, though at least one who did said he hoped it would be amended at the committee stage.
Most of the Tory leadership candidates voted in support of the bill, except for Andrew Scheer, a former Speaker of the House; and MP Brad Trost, two social-conservative candidates. The third social-conservative leadership candidate, Pierre Lemieux, no longer sits in the House of Commons.
“The underlying philosophy of this bill is about social engineering,” Trost told CCN after the vote. “It’s an impractical, unworkable bill, and it doesn’t deal with any real problem.”
“Coexistence is what makes diversity great, not an artificial inclusiveness that simply moves the markers and tosses that which does not agree out of the equation by defining a different view, belief, or right to share that perspective as hateful,” Conservative MP Cathay Wagantall told the House.
She expressed the concerns of parents about their children sharing locker rooms and washrooms with people who determine they are a different gender from their biological sex. “In our zeal to want to be seen as fair and open-minded, we seem to have forgotten the faces of those whose equal rights also exist,” she said.
“If we are in fact prepared to pass this law and let everyone do whatever they want on any given day or whim, do we not have a responsibility to ensure that we are not now discriminating against the larger population’s health, safety, and quality of life?”
During debate on the bill, some Conservatives raised concerns about religious freedom. Harold Albrecht asked if faith communities and immigrant communities would “have the freedom to teach their children and practise their beliefs without being accused of hate speech or human rights violations.”
Many people might become afraid to discuss public policy issues such as this one, for fear of disagreeing with the “government-imposed agenda,” he said.
He warned of potential harm to children and youth, and the difficulty of dealing with the subjective nature of the term “gender identity and expression.”
