The federal government has introduced new legislation to “make bail laws stricter and toughen sentencing laws.”
Sean Fraser, the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, introduced the Bail and Sentencing Reform Act, known as Bill C-14, in the House of Commons on Thursday, Oct. 23. The act will go to a second reading in the House of Commons at a later date.
“Canada’s new government is moving ahead with sweeping reforms to keep Canadians safe. We’re proposing over 80 clauses of targeted changes that will make bail harder to get while also toughening sentencing laws for repeat and violent offenders,” Fraser said. “We are supporting police on the front lines, and we are investing in long-term prevention, like housing, mental health, and youth programs, so communities are safer over time. In the coming months, we will also bring forward additional measures to better protect people facing sexual and intimate partner violence, and to keep children safe from horrific crimes.”
The clauses include changes to the Criminal Code, the Youth Criminal Justice Act and the National Defence Act.
The legislation includes a “reverse-onus bail” for major crimes. This means that instead of a Crown prosecutor having to prove in court why an accused person should stay behind bars until their trial, the person who has been charged has to show why they should be released. In these cases, “courts must closely scrutinize the bail plan of the accused, who would be required to clearly demonstrate that their plan is reliable and credible, in order to be released on bail.”
The act would also introduce consecutive sentencing, which would mean longer time spent behind bars, for those convicted of violent crimes such as extortion, auto theft and break and enter. For example, the proposed amendments state that “a sentence for extortion be served consecutively (one after another) to a sentence imposed for arson.” Currently, most sentences are served at the same time (concurrently).
It also looks to impose harsher penalties for organized retail theft and restrict conditional sentences for a number of sexual offences.
The federal government stated that these changes to the Criminal Code, if implemented, will only be effective if “provincial and territorial governments do their part in supporting their implementation.”
This is something that B.C. is ready to do and is already doing, said B.C. Attorney General Niki Sharma.
“I have to say my personal experience of this was very collaborative,” Sharma said. She, along with her colleagues, brought forward many ideas to Fraser and the federal government about “how to make our system better.”
“To me, it was a great example of how our country works when we’re all working together to solve things, and it is a joint responsibility, so I fully take on my responsibility,” Sharma said.
Sharma said that many of the proposed changes announced Thursday (Oct. 23) “came straight from” the work the provincial government had been doing to make B.C. safer.
The province has advocated for bail reform after the deaths of Surrey’s Tori Dunn and Kelowna’s Bailey McCourt.
Tori Dunn, 30, was found with life-threatening injuries in her home in Surrey’s Port Kells neighbourhood on June 16, 2024. She later died in hospital. She was suspected of having been killed by a violent repeat offender, who was out on bail, in her home.
James Plover is accused of murdering his former partner, Bailey McCourt, in a parking lot on July 4, 2025. Plover was found guilty for uttering threats and assault by strangulation stemming from a 2024 incident just hours before McCourt’s death.
At the time, he was not released on bail but instead bound by the same conditions from his release in 2024, along with a $500 bond, as he awaited a sentencing hearing set for September.
Sharma previously said it’s clear that changes needed to be made around intimate partner violence and the protections for victims when they come forward to talk and seek safety.
Sharma had asked for two specific changes to be made to the Criminal Code in relation to intimate partner violence. The first is to have a reverse onus for strangling and choking, and for those convicted of these crimes and similar intimate partner crimes to be held from when they are convicted until they are sentenced.
“My hope is that means that what happened to Bailey will never happen again in this province or this country,” she said.
This bill is “transformative in a lot of ways,” Sharma said. “We know there’s lots of work to do, but there’s a lot of things in here that are reflective of B.C. leadership that will keep repeat and violent offenders off the street, will target prolific offenders, will give us better tools for bail and sentencing on extortion that’s happening in our province, and will protect people against intimate partner violence.”
This bill is broader than previous bail reform legislation, as it not only targets repeat violent offenders but also prolific offenders.
“These are the people that have shown a lack of respect for the law, where there are repeated breaches, and they go before the court over and over again,” Sharma said.
She understands the concern that some in the legal community have about the proposed changes.
Veronica Martisius, BC Civil Liberties Association litigation staff counsel, told Black Press Media that a “tough on crime approach is not grounded in sound evidence.”
The proposed changes “undermine the presumption of innocence,” and if passed, will “undermine our Charter rights,” Martisius said.
Sharma said it is a balancing act in criminal law between the rights of the victim and the public, and the rights of the accused. “The things that we asked for, we think land in that direction. They balance out the reason and need to protect the public and/or the victim with the rights of somebody going through the criminal justice process.”
But Martisius argued, regarding the proposed changes to bail: “They put the onus on the accused to prove why they shouldn’t be denied bail rather than the onus being on the state to prove why they should be detained.”
“We’re also concerned that the proposed sentencing amendments limit judicial discretion in decision-making by removing sentencing options for certain offences and therefore limit a judge’s ability to take a nuanced approach.”
-With files from Lauren Collins
About the Author: Anna Burns
I cover breaking news, health care, court and social issues-related topics for the Surrey Now-Leader. anna.burns@surreynowleader.com Follow Anna on Twitter.