44th Parl. 1st Sess.
November 30, 2023 10:00AM
- Nov/30/23 4:17:57 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I too am pleased to see this bill back before the House fairly quickly, with Senate amendments, which I think help improve the bill.
We can make the legislative changes around bail, but there is a concern about public disorder and low-level offenders. We know that one of the reasons people who might be on bail for low-level offences reoffend is that they lack access to mental health programs, adequate income and a lot of the things that would help them overcome the problems that lead them into conflict with their neighbours, friends, family and the legal system.
Will there also be a commitment from the government to provide the funding we need to help support people being a success when they are on bail?
129 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/30/23 4:57:01 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, if the Liberal member of Parliament from British Columbia wants to know what is happening in small and medium-sized cities, we have had a Liberal government for eight years that has passed soft-on-crime legislation that has put repeat violent offenders on the streets, over and over again, and we are seeing skyrocketing crime rates. The Liberals broke the bail system; that is why the bill is before us. The Liberals are admitting that the bail reforms they made are broken and are not working. However, they are not going far enough. The Liberals need a little more humility.
Here is the thing. This is the problem with the member from British Columbia. I cited the Vancouver Police Union and the Union of B.C. Municipalities that talked about exactly that for repeat violent offenders, but the member goes on and blames everybody else but the Liberal government. Liberals have been in power for eight years. Crime went down before they came into office, and since they have been there, it has only gone up.
179 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/30/23 4:58:05 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, my colleague has already touched on the subject, but I would like him to tell us more about other initiatives that are seeking stronger mechanisms to ensure that the justice system is more closely aligned with public safety, particularly with regard to repeat offenders or people who commit offences using a firearm.
Can he remind us of what more should be done?
64 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/30/23 4:58:38 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my Bloc Québécois colleague for asking me this question, which I appreciate. As a bonus, it gives me a chance to practise my second language a bit.
A lot of work can be done in communities across the country to reduce gun violence, for example.
There are a lot of things we could do when working with law enforcement, and not take away tools, like bail reform, by saying that repeat violent offenders can have a revolving door. We need to go after the smuggling of firearms from the United States. We need to go after gang violence and its increases. Programs for youth and deterrents for those crimes need to be investments. We need to invest in our law enforcement, not take resources away.
At the end of the day, when we look at this and at the root causes, not just the devastating numbers I mentioned from Stats Canada, we are seeing repeat violent offenders being a significant part of the increase. We are seeing illegally smuggled guns being part of it. We are seeing a government that is completely unserious about addressing the problem and that is instead going after law-abiding hunters and firearm owners in this country rather than going after the root causes.
220 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/30/23 4:59:57 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I am a bit puzzled by the speech from the Conservative member, because, of course, his party was part of the House of Commons that unanimously supported the bill. His party was the one that called for swift action to deal with repeat violent offenders. Many of the groups the member cited in raising the problem now support the bill. It is a little puzzling to hear the tone of the speech, when I hope the Conservatives are still supporting a bill like this, which has been so broadly supported by the Canadian public, including premiers, police and victims associations.
102 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I would say that the member needs to dig a little deeper into the testimony and into the words being said.
Again, Bill C-48 would fix a small part of a very big problem in this country. It is not the end. It is not that we just pass the bill and walk away and clap, saying that it is a job well done. There is a lot more that needs to be done. There are many examples, as I cited in my speech, of repeat violent offenders getting out through a revolving door, over and over again.
The Liberals are taking a narrow approach that would not fix the problem and would not get crime rates and the crime wave addressed in this country. The NDP always does this. New Democrats go along with the Liberals; they go along with the plan, and now, they are just as responsible for the backtrack. They pushed the initial bill, Bill C-75 every step the way. They are admitting, just as much as the Liberals are, that they were soft on crime and that they are wrong in their approach. They need more humility. They need a little more water in their wine, and they need to do a full backtrack.
Law enforcement, Canadians and numerous experts are saying that this is one step, but many more steps are needed to fix the problem. The work is not done yet.
242 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/30/23 5:12:35 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I am going to give my colleague an opportunity to use up a bit more floor time.
Joking aside, this is a very serious subject. We are seeking a fragile balance between individual rights and collective rights, the protection of society and the community. This is not an easy balance to strike.
I am very interested in what my colleague had to say. He showed that people do not need to spend a lot of time talking when what they say is clear and precise. I congratulate him. As my colleague explained, this bill applies to repeat offenders when the offence is repeated within a five-year period. Could he tell us whether the bill makes a distinction for prolific offenders? Does that change anything? Is the five-year period extended in their case?
When we talk about issues like this, it is easy to fall into the trap of populism, because we can all think about horrific cases we have seen or heard about. I would like to know whether this is clearly expressed in the bill, and whether there is any leeway for the judge. It is also important to allow the judge to gauge the specific situation. I would like to hear what my colleague has to say.
213 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
