Justice Committee on May 31st, 2012

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

I understand and agree with that. I agree with this amendment, if that's the case. But it reads: “In imposing a sentence under paragraph (1.1)(a.2), the court shall take into account the age and vulnerability of the victim.” As a legislator, I want to make sure the mandatory minimum applies and that judges do not use that section to avoid applying it.

[Nathalie Levman]

Your concern is that it might exclude the mandatory minimum penalty.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

Yes. In your reading, does it do that?

[Nathalie Levman]

May I take a minute to read through it?

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

Please do.

[Nathalie Levman]

Upon first reading, it doesn't look as if it excludes the application of the proposed mandatory minimum penalty. However, if the committee would feel more comfortable if I consulted colleagues who are experts in sentencing, I could make sure that it doesn't defeat the purpose of this private member's bill.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

I'd certainly like to hear from the mover of the amendment whether or not it was his intention to exclude it.

[Irwin Cotler, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

No, my intention is to take into account the factors of age and vulnerability.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

So you did not want to exclude the application of the minimum sentence.

[Irwin Cotler, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

Well, I'm not happy with the minimum sentence.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

I understand that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dave MacKenzie]

Since there are no further intervenors, we'll have a vote.

(Amendment agreed to)

Now we have LIB-3.

Mr. Cotler.

[Irwin Cotler, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

This amendment addresses the concern I raised with respect to the government amendment, namely that while the wording of “parent, guardian or person having the lawful care or charge” is seemingly encompassing, it may not be so. I want to ensure that there's some flexibility and that we acknowledge a relationship such as a teacher, clergyman, or extended family member that may, depending on the age, either aggravate or mitigate the gravity of the offence. It's intended to provide more flexibility within the framework of the government's own amendment.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dave MacKenzie]

Thank you, Mr. Cotler.

Madam Findlay.

[Kerry-Lynne Findlay, Conservative, Delta—Richmond East, BC]

We would be opposed to this amendment. We think that the government amendment, which has passed, speaks to relationships and has narrowed the scope of the application of the mandatory minimum penalty in a way that makes sense. We believe that this amendment is unnecessary and doesn't achieve what I'm hearing the intent to be. We're opposed to it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dave MacKenzie]

Thank you.

Mr. Scott.

[Craig Scott, NDP, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

Just to make sure nobody else is as confused as I am, this is the same as the last amendment, correct? It doesn't have anything to do with affecting the mandatory minimum we've adopted, right?

I was worried that this was part of your concern.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dave MacKenzie]

Thank you.

(Amendment negatived)

Shall clause 1 as amended carry?

[Françoise Boivin, NDP, Gatineau, QC]

May we have a recorded vote?

(Clause 1 as amended agreed to: yeas 6; nays 5)

[The Chair, Conservative, Dave MacKenzie]

Shall the title carry?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

On division.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dave MacKenzie]

Shall the bill as amended carry?

(Bill as amended agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

Shall the chair report the bill as amended to the House?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dave MacKenzie]

Shall the committee order a reprint of the bill as amended for the use of the House at report stage?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.