SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 219 - Sep/18/23

Mr. René Villemure (Trois-Rivières, BQ)

Sep/18/23 12:21:19 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-48

Mr. Speaker, let me congratulate you on the success of this return to Parliament. I also wish to congratulate the minister on his promotion. I am sure we will have ample opportunities to work together in the future. I have a question for the minister. I am concerned that any tampering with the presumption of innocence or the right to remain silent could set dangerous precedents. My question is simple. In its current form, is Bill C‑48 fair?

80 words

Context: House Hansard - 219 - Sep/18/23

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux

Sep/18/23 1:56:44 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-48

Mr. Speaker, I do not know if that lulled the volume, but let me go on with what Mark Baxter, the president of the Police Association of Ontario, had to say: Police personnel haven’t just been asking for a “tough on crime” approach, we have been advocating for a balanced approach that includes prevention and rehabilitation, but also recognizes that a small number of repeat, violent offenders need to be held accountable for their actions. Bill C-48 is a step in the right direction, and we sincerely hope the Courts will use these new measures that are being introduced by the government in cases where circumstances warrant. The last quote I would like to refer to is from Jon Reid, the president of the Toronto Police Association. He said: Our members recognize that our Charter ensures we all benefit from a presumption of innocence, but for too long the current balance has put the rights of an accused well above the rights our communities have to public safety and security. Ensuring the public maintains its confidence in the administration of justice is paramount, and I believe the introduction of Bill C- 48, and the clear message being sent by the government that public safety remains a top priority, will help victims of crime, as well as all Canadians know serious, repeat violent offenders can and will be held accountable for their actions. I believe that reinforces the messages we are hearing from politicians of all political stripes and at all levels of government that recognize we want our communities to be a safe environment for our constituents. Bill C-48 is a progressive piece of legislation that has had extensive consultations. It would make a profound and positive difference by ensuring the communities in which we live are safer. That is why I believe we should look to the Leader of the Opposition and hold him to his word when he spoke of it having a quick passage. I believe the intent of the House of Commons is to see this legislation passed in a quick fashion to allow it to go to committee. I have not heard anyone say that the principle of this legislation is something they cannot support. With that type of support for Bill C-48, I would conclude that it is the type of legislation that should get passed through the House to allow the committee to do the fine work that it does. We need to remember that this is all about keeping the communities that we represent safer. To me, that is so very important. That is why I stand today with my colleagues in support of the legislation with the hope of seeing it passed in a relatively quick fashion.

463 words

All Topics

Context: House Hansard - 219 - Sep/18/23

Mr. Don Davies (Vancouver Kingsway, NDP)

Sep/18/23 5:10:20 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-48

Madam Speaker, I think the average person on the street would probably agree with the principle that someone who has repeat offended at some point would require a reverse onus for bail. However, I am thinking of one of the cornerstones of the rule of law system in our country, which is the presumption of innocence. We have a right to walk the streets and have liberty, and if the state charges us with a crime, we have a right to be presumed innocent and not to be deprived of our liberty. I am wondering how my hon. colleague squares that notion with the concept of reverse onus, where somebody who is accused would have to justify why they would retain liberty instead of being incarcerated pending a trial and pending conviction of the crime, which has not yet occurred. Does he have any concerns in that regard?

148 words

Context: House Hansard - 219 - Sep/18/23

Mr. Tako Van Popta

Sep/18/23 5:11:20 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-48

Madam Speaker, of course we all stand behind the age-old principle of the presumption of innocence and the right to reasonable bail. However, I am going to talk again about the 40 people who have been responsible for 6,000 interactions with the police, which is 150, on average, per person. At some point, perhaps they lose their right to be free on bail. The problem with Bill C-75 is that it gutted the court's ability to punish people who breached bail conditions, which is why people keep coming back time and time again with no consequences. The public is losing confidence in the criminal justice system because of that revolving door insanity.

116 words

All Topics