Senator Pate: Thank you for those very important questions. This will not repeal any mandatory minimum penalties that are not already repealed by the bill. They will stay intact. It merely allows for a judge, after weighing all of the circumstances, to apply the sentencing principles and determine if, in exceptional circumstances, it is appropriate to impose something other than the mandatory minimum penalty. So, no, it does not remove any that are not already repealed by the bill. It leaves them in place. As Minister Lametti said, and as Senator Gold said — my view is similar — you will likely still see judges imposing penalties more severe when the circumstances call for it. Thank you.

Hon. Denise Batters: Senator Plett, thank you for outlining in your speech a number of different examples of mandatory minimum penalties for certain crimes and the relatively low numbers that those are. Some of the examples you gave are very serious crimes where the mandatory minimum sentences were only about four years.

Another one that I wanted to draw the attention of this chamber to, and ask if you agree with is this: What has scarcely been mentioned in this entire debate on this amendment is the fact that the mandatory minimum in Canada for first-degree murder is only 25 years — that there’s a chance for parole after that point — and for second-degree murder, only 10 years.

Given that the mandatory minimums are really quite low when you look at the types of offences that we would look at in the U.S. and other places that many Canadians would perhaps be more familiar with, wouldn’t you agree that those mandatory minimums, being at those low levels, are something that really needs to be considered when we’re talking about upholding those?