Bill S-204 explained in plain English
An Act to amend the Criminal Code (protection of children)
Federal Parliament bill summary, status, timeline, sponsor, votes, and official sources.
At a glance
Official Parliament of Canada snapshot for 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. MP vote breakdowns appear when the House of Commons publishes a recorded division export for that bill. Senate and House stage details include official debate/sitting links when LEGISinfo publishes them.
Our plain-language take, written for civic education.
Source: By PoliticalData.ca
Bill S-204 removes the legal justification for schoolteachers, parents, and guardians to use physical force as a form of correction on children in their care.
Bill S-204 proposes to delete section 43 of the Criminal Code. Currently, section 43 allows schoolteachers, parents, and people acting in the place of a parent to use physical force to correct a child under their care, as long as the force is reasonable under the circumstances. This bill would remove that legal permission entirely. This means that using physical force for correction purposes would no longer have a legal justification under that section of the Criminal Code. The bill includes a transition period of up to one year between when it becomes law and when it takes effect, which the government can use to inform Canadians about the change and coordinate with provinces.
- Repeals section 43 of the Criminal Code, which currently provides a legal justification for schoolteachers, parents, and people standing in the place of a parent to use physical force as correction toward a child under their care
- Provides that the law comes into force either one year after receiving royal assent or on an earlier date set by order of the Governor in Council, whichever is sooner
- Allows the federal government up to one year between passage and implementation to educate Canadians and coordinate with provinces on the change
- Schoolteachers
- Parents
- People standing in the place of a parent (guardians, caregivers)
- Children under the care of these persons
- Law enforcement and courts applying the Criminal Code
- Current justification under section 43 to use reasonable physical force for child correction would be removed
- Schoolteachers, parents, and guardians would no longer have a legal defence based on section 43 if charged with assault or related offences for using physical force on children
- The Act comes into force one year after receiving royal assent or on an earlier date fixed by order of the Governor in Council, whichever is sooner
- The bill text does not specify what other legal defences, if any, would remain available in criminal law for contact with children
- The bill does not explain how removal of this justification would interact with other provisions of the Criminal Code or provincial laws
- The actual date of coming into force after royal assent is not specified in the bill; it will depend on a future order of the Governor in Council
- The bill provides no detail on what education or coordination activities the government plans during the transition period
The legal justification for schoolteachers, parents, and guardians to use physical force to correct children under their care is removed from federal law
Source: Section 1
Generated using AI from official bill text. Not legal advice. It is written by PoliticalData.ca for civic education, automatically checked and spot-reviewed before publishing.
Official textParliamentary Process
Bill S-204, concerning amendments to the Criminal Code for child protection, completed its first reading in the Senate on March 9, 2010.
Bill S-204, concerning amendments to the Criminal Code for the protection of children, had its first reading in the Senate on March 9, 2010. This stage is a procedural step where the bill is formally introduced. The bill later proceeded to second reading.
Bill S-204, an Act to amend the Criminal Code (protection of children), received first reading in the Senate and was scheduled for second reading debate.
On March 9, 2010, in the Senate, Bill S-204, an Act to amend the Criminal Code (protection of children), was presented for its first reading. Senator Céline Hervieux-Payette introduced the bill. The Senate then scheduled the bill for a second reading debate to take place two days later. The rest of the sitting involved other routine proceedings, senator statements on various topics, questions and answers between senators, and debate on other matters before Parliament.
Bill S-204, concerning the protection of children and amendments to the Criminal Code, was undergoing debate at the second reading stage in the Senate.
This record describes the second reading stage of Bill S-204 in the Senate. The second reading debate occurred on March 21, 2011, following earlier readings and major speeches in June, October, November, and December of 2010, and March 2011. The bill's sponsor, Senator Céline Hervieux-Payette, gave a speech on April 28, 2010, and Senator Donald Neil Plett responded on December 1, 2010. The stage was not completed as of this record.
During a Senate sitting on April 28, 2010, the debate on Bill S-204, concerning the protection of children, was adjourned by Senator Hervieux-Payette, while other bills, including those related to terrorism, serious crime, and gender parity on corporate boards, were debated or adjourned.
This document is a record of a Senate sitting on April 28, 2010. The sitting included Senators' Statements on various topics, Routine Proceedings such as tabling reports, Question Period addressing issues like the lobster and snow crab industries, and Orders of the Day where debates on several bills were adjourned or continued. Specifically, the debate for Bill S-204, an Act to amend the Criminal Code (protection of children), was adjourned by Senator Hervieux-Payette. Other debates included Bill S-7 (Justice for Victims of Terrorism), Bill S-6 (Serious Time for the Most Serious Crime Act), and Bill S-206 (Board of Directors Gender Parity Bill).
During a Senate sitting on June 10, 2010, debate continued on Bill S-204, focusing on the principles of amending the Criminal Code concerning child protection and the use of force in child-rearing, alongside other legislative business.
This document is a record of a Senate sitting held on June 10, 2010. The sitting included Senators' Statements on various topics, the tabling of reports, oral questions, and the continuation of debates on several bills. Specifically, Bill S-204, "An Act to amend the Criminal Code (protection of children)," was at the second reading stage, and a debate on its principles occurred. The debate focused on the effectiveness of the "tough on crime" approach versus prevention, the role of parenting education, and the scientific basis for prohibiting the use of physical force in child-rearing. The debate also touched upon international comparisons and the potential impact on parental rights. The sitting also included debates on other bills, including Bill C-9 (An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 4, 2010 and other measures) and Bill S-7 (An Act to deter terrorism and to amend the State Immunity Act).
In the Senate, Senator Hervieux-Payette spoke in favour of Bill S-204, advocating for the repeal of section 43 of the Criminal Code to eliminate the use of force in child-rearing and emphasizing prevention and parenting education.
During a Senate debate on June 10, 2010, Senator Hervieux-Payette spoke in favour of Bill S-204, an Act to amend the Criminal Code concerning the protection of children. She argued for the repeal of section 43 of the Criminal Code, which she believes permits the use of force in child-rearing, and advocated for a focus on prevention and parenting education. Senator Hervieux-Payette cited scientific research suggesting that violence in child-rearing can lead to aggression and other negative outcomes. She also referenced international examples, such as Sweden, where similar laws have been enacted. The debate was adjourned.
During a Senate sitting on October 6, 2010, the debate on Bill S-204, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (protection of children), was adjourned to a later date.
This Senate sitting on October 6, 2010, included debate on Bill S-204, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (protection of children). The debate on Bill S-204 was adjourned to allow Senator Donald Neil Plett more time to prepare his remarks. The sitting also featured other proceedings, including Senators' Statements on various topics, Question Period concerning National Defence, Agriculture, Finance, Social Affairs, and Human Resources, and debates on other motions. No votes were taken on Bill S-204 during this sitting.
On November 25, 2010, the Senate continued debates on several bills, heard from the Privacy Commissioner, and debated legislation concerning prisoner benefits and gender equity in Indian registration.
The Senate convened for a sitting on November 25, 2010. The Order of the Day included continued debates on several bills: Bill S-204 (An Act to amend the Criminal Code - protection of children), Bill C-232 (An Act to amend the Supreme Court Act), Bill C-288 (An Act to amend the Income Tax Act - tax credit for new graduates), and a motion regarding a scholarship fund for survivors of public safety officers. Debate on Bill S-204 was adjourned. Additionally, the Senate received committee reports, tabled documents, and held Question Period on climate change policy and Edmonton's bid for Expo 2017. A significant portion of the sitting involved a Committee of the Whole to hear from Jennifer Stoddart regarding her reappointment as Privacy Commissioner, where she discussed her office's work and the challenges of privacy in the digital age. The Senate also considered Bill C-31 (Eliminating Entitlements for Prisoners Act) at second reading and Bill C-3 (An Act to promote gender equity in Indian registration) at second reading, referring the latter to committee.
During the Senate's second reading debate on Bill S-204, senators discussed the implications of repealing section 43 of the Criminal Code regarding parental discipline, with arguments presented both for and against the repeal.
On December 1, 2010, the Senate was engaged in debate on Bill S-204, an Act to amend the Criminal Code (protection of children). The debate focused on the proposed repeal of section 43 of the Criminal Code, which provides a justification for the use of force by way of correction by parents and teachers. One senator argued against repealing this section, stating that it would infringe on the rights of responsible parents to discipline their children and could lead to the criminalization of normal parenting practices. The senator cited research and personal anecdotes to support the argument that corporal punishment, when used reasonably and not as abuse, can be an effective disciplinary measure and that its prohibition could have unintended negative consequences. The debate also touched upon the importance of allowing parents the discretion in how they raise their children without undue government interference. The bill's sponsor, Senator Hervieux-Payette, engaged in a question period with the opposing senator, clarifying points and seeking further study of the bill. The sitting also included tributes to notable Canadians, discussions on other bills, and question period on various government policies.
In a Senate debate on Bill S-204, Senator Plett argued against repealing the section of the Criminal Code that permits reasonable physical correction of children by parents, stating it infringes on parental rights and responsibilities.
During this Senate debate at second reading for Bill S-204, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (protection of children), Senator Donald Neil Plett spoke in opposition to the bill. He argued that repealing Section 43 of the Criminal Code, which allows for reasonable physical correction of children by parents, would overstep the government's role into family matters and criminalize normal parenting activities. Senator Plett cited personal anecdotes and research to support his view that responsible parents should retain the discretion to discipline their children, distinguishing between discipline and abuse. The debate also touched on other unrelated Senate proceedings and discussions.
On December 7, 2010, the Senate held a sitting that included tributes to a former senator, routine proceedings, question period, and continued debates on various bills, notably including the second reading debate of Bill S-204 concerning the protection of children.
This record details a sitting of the Senate on December 7, 2010. The sitting began with tributes to the late Honourable Norman K. Atkins, a former senator. Following this, various routine proceedings occurred, including the tabling of reports from several committees and the first reading of two bills: Bill C-22, An Act respecting the mandatory reporting of Internet child pornography by persons who provide an Internet service, and Bill C-35, An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. Motions were also introduced regarding committee studies and recognizing December 10 as Human Rights Day. The Question Period included a delayed answer regarding long-term disability benefits for Nortel employees and an answer to an order paper question about the Canadian Polar Commission. The Orders of the Day featured debates and continued debates on several bills, including Bill S-215 (amendments from the House of Commons), Bill C-36 (Canada Consumer Product Safety Act), Bill S-10 (Controlled Drugs and Substances Act), Bill S-204 (Criminal Code - protection of children), Bill S-220 (Official Languages Act), Bill S-219 (Canada Post Corporation Act), Bill C-232 (Supreme Court Act), and Bill S-216 (Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act). The debate on Bill S-204, concerning the protection of children, continued.
During a Senate sitting on March 1, 2011, the debate on Bill S-204 (An Act to amend the Criminal Code (protection of children)) was adjourned as the government was not yet ready to proceed, while other legislative business and discussions took place.
On March 1, 2011, the Senate convened for a sitting that included tributes to the late Honourable Marian L. Maloney, discussions on various timely matters such as Red Cross Month and the situation in Libya, tabling of official documents, a question period addressing foreign affairs and finance, and several debates on bills. Notably, Bill S-204, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (protection of children), was on the Order Paper for second reading debate, but the debate was adjourned at the request of the Deputy Leader of the Government who stated they were still preparing their comments. Other bills discussed included amendments to the Electricity and Gas Inspection Act and Weights and Measures Act, the Criminal Code and National Defence Act, the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, the Canada Pension Plan, the Corrections and Conditional Release Act, and the Canada Post Corporation Act. The sitting also included the presentation of committee reports.
During a Senate sitting on March 21, 2011, members discussed various matters including Bill S-204 concerning child protection and amended the Criminal Code, heard a Speaker's ruling on Royal Consent for another bill, and debated numerous other reports and inquiries.
This Senate sitting record from March 21, 2011, details various proceedings including Senators' Statements on topics like the Year of the Entrepreneur and International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination. Routine Proceedings included tabling of reports and first readings of several bills, including Bill C-54, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (sexual offences against children). The Orders of the Day featured continued debate on Bill S-204, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (protection of children), a ruling on a point of order regarding Royal Consent for Bill C-232 (Supreme Court Act), and third readings of Bills C-30, C-35, and C-42. Debate on Bill S-204 focused on amending section 43 of the Criminal Code concerning the protection of children and repealing corporal punishment. The sitting also included debates on other bills and inquiries on various topics.
We don't have a plain-language summary for Third reading yet. The official source linked below is the full record.
We don't have a plain-language summary for First reading yet. The official source linked below is the full record.
We don't have a plain-language summary for Second reading yet. The official source linked below is the full record.
We don't have a plain-language summary for Consideration in committee yet. The official source linked below is the full record.
We don't have a plain-language summary for Report stage yet. The official source linked below is the full record.
We don't have a plain-language summary for Third reading yet. The official source linked below is the full record.
Debate and sitting links point to official parliamentary sources when LEGISinfo publishes them. Any plain-language discussion summaries should be generated from those official texts and reviewed before public display.
Vote Summary
This bill is still active. We only show vote counts after the legislature publishes a recorded division.
No published representative vote breakdown
This bill is still moving through the process. When a recorded division is published, representative positions can be listed here.
Official sources
Status, sponsor, votes, and timeline on this page are drawn from these official legislative sources and public records. Each summary above is attributed to its own source.
How this data is sourced