SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 276

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
February 6, 2024 10:00AM
Context: House Hansard - 276 - Feb/6/24
Mr. Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe (Lac-Saint-Jean, BQ)
  • Feb/6/24 12:37:19 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, the Bloc Québécois is obviously concerned about the situation. My colleague from Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia wants to ensure that the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security conducts a study. Strangely enough, the Conservatives do not seem to want that study to happen. They would rather have an opposition day about it, which, by the way, will not do much to change what is happening in the country. We are having an opposition day today and we will vote on a motion. Not much will change once we have voted on the motion, whether it is adopted or not. However, a study by the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security could get results by making serious recommendations and hearing expert testimony. Speaking of expert testimony, I would like to ask a simple question. The Conservatives are proposing a three-year prison sentence for a third auto theft offence. What expert proposed a three-year sentence? Why are the Conservatives proposing a three-year sentence as opposed to a three-and-a-half-, two-and-a-half-, four- or five-year sentence? What is the rationale behind the three-year duration? I am not for or against that. I just want to understand why. What expert recommended that? Why are they proposing a three-year sentence?
231 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border