An Act to amend the Judges Act

This bill is from the 39th Parliament, 2nd session, which ended in September 2008.

Sponsor

Rob Nicholson  Conservative

Status

This bill has received Royal Assent and is now law.

Summary

This is from the published bill.

This enactment increases the number of judicial salaries that may be paid under paragraph 24(3)(b) of the Judges Act from thirty to fifty.

Elsewhere

All sorts of information on this bill is available at LEGISinfo, an excellent resource from the Library of Parliament. You can also read the full text of the bill.

Bill numbers are reused for different bills each new session. Perhaps you were looking for one of these other C-31s:

C-31 (2022) Law Cost of Living Relief Act, No. 2 (Targeted Support for Households)
C-31 (2021) Reducing Barriers to Reintegration Act
C-31 (2016) Law Canada-Ukraine Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act
C-31 (2014) Law Economic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 1
C-31 (2012) Law Protecting Canada's Immigration System Act
C-31 (2010) Law Eliminating Entitlements for Prisoners Act

Judges ActGovernment Orders

April 14th, 2008 / 5:35 p.m.

Liberal

Jean-Claude D'Amours Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB

The Conservative government and all of the members opposite were sure that there would be an election within six months. They did not do anything; they just waited. All of a sudden, nine months later, they said that they would wait another three months, and then there would be an election. But no election was triggered. Their only goal was to do things for the short term.

The truth is that we are here to run a country. We are not here to run it for the short term until the next election. We, the Liberals, are looking to the future. Just as we have always done in the past, we are looking to the future.

Judges ActGovernment Orders

April 14th, 2008 / 5:35 p.m.

An hon. member

Oh, oh.

Judges ActGovernment Orders

April 14th, 2008 / 5:35 p.m.

Liberal

Jean-Claude D'Amours Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB

I can hear the Conservative members acting up. That is what we call lack of respect. Once they have listened to the interpretation, they will understand what I just told them. The truth is that there has to be respect not only in the House, but in everything.

Let us look at the situation. With regard to Bill C-31, it is clear that if the government had met its obligations over the past two and a half years and had filled positions equitably as it went along, we would not need to discuss certain things today.

Today, we are talking about a bill that aims to increase the number of judges, because it is important that Canadians be treated equitably. It is also important that the government have a legal system in place so that people who have needs and want to defend their rights can do so, and not just when it suits the government.

Unfortunately, the Conservatives sometimes tell people that they can go to court whenever they want to, even if they have no money, because that is not a problem. In the end, if people do not have any money, they will not be treated equitably in this country. We do not understand that in the same way. We want to make sure Canadians have the services they need so that when they want to defend their rights, the tools are in place in the government or the legal system. In this way, Canadians will be able to defend their rights, which is crucial.

The comments my colleague opposite made before he posed his question are deplorable. The fact is that the Conservatives are not equipped or capable to debate a bill like Bill C-31. They are forced to make personal attacks on individual members. This is unfortunate, but in recent months, the Conservatives have been embroiled in one scandal after another.

We can talk about Bill C-31 if the members want to, but the members opposite are going to have to be much more serious when making their comments. One thing is clear: either they have not listened to anything that has been said or they have not understood anything that has been said. Perhaps it is a bit of both or something else.

The fact is that there are concerns about Bill C-31, and they are justified. Access to justice must be provided equitably. Decisions about judicial appointments must be made equitably and not in a partisan way, as the Conservatives have been doing for the past two and a half years.

Judges ActGovernment Orders

April 14th, 2008 / 5:40 p.m.

The Acting Speaker Royal Galipeau

The hon. member for Hull—Aylmer should know that there are three and a half minutes remaining. If the question takes three minutes, the answer will take 30 seconds, and vice versa.

Judges ActGovernment Orders

April 14th, 2008 / 5:40 p.m.

Liberal

Marcel Proulx Liberal Hull—Aylmer, QC

Mr. Speaker, I am disappointed that you would make assumptions, because you know that I like to get to the point, and that I want some answers from my colleague from Madawaska—Restigouche.

Earlier, my colleague alluded to bilingualism and the fact that the judges appointed in New Brunswick ought to speak French. Mr. Speaker, I would like to know what would happen in his province if the government appointed judges who spoke French but not English?

Judges ActGovernment Orders

April 14th, 2008 / 5:40 p.m.

Liberal

Jean-Claude D'Amours Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague. That is an excellent question. As I was saying earlier, it is a matter of respect, and it goes both ways: francophones towards anglophones, and anglophones towards francophones. We do not want judges to be appointed solely for their ability to serve francophones. We also want the judges appointed to be able to serve anglophones. As I said, we must be fair.

Fairness implies that if a judge could provide a service in English within a given period of time, then the same should be possible in French within that same period of time.

Thus, it is important to be fair and to ensure that all Canadians have access to justice. That is what we, the Liberals, want to do.

Judges ActGovernment Orders

April 14th, 2008 / 5:40 p.m.

Liberal

Larry Bagnell Liberal Yukon, YT

Mr. Speaker, we could get this bill over with, because I want to speak on the next bill, but the committee asked the Conservatives to do three things.

First, was to consult to ensure the judges were given out regionally and appropriately. Has the member heard if the Conservatives have done that?

Second, there are only 14 judges. That is less than one per territory. Is less than one judge enough to fill the backlog in Quebec?

Finally, has the member been told of a plan to ensure that linguistic implementation and allocation is appropriate, especially for provinces like New Brunswick and Quebec?

Judges ActGovernment Orders

April 14th, 2008 / 5:40 p.m.

The Acting Speaker Royal Galipeau

The hon. member for Madawaska—Restigouche has 40 seconds to respond.

Judges ActGovernment Orders

April 14th, 2008 / 5:40 p.m.

Liberal

Jean-Claude D'Amours Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB

Mr. Speaker, my colleague has certainly asked some excellent questions, and I will try to answer them as quickly as possible.

To answer his first question, it is obvious that consultation is not the Conservatives' strong point. It is strange, each time they hold a consultation, they always do the opposite of what is suggested. They consult the public, ask people their opinion, but they do the opposite.

So I do not believe that there are many consultations taking place. The reality is that they are not listening at all.

Certainly, this is the reality for all Canadian citizens in terms of linguistic issues.

Judges ActGovernment Orders

April 14th, 2008 / 5:40 p.m.

The Acting Speaker Royal Galipeau

Is the House ready for the question?

Judges ActGovernment Orders

April 14th, 2008 / 5:40 p.m.

Some hon. members

Question.

Judges ActGovernment Orders

April 14th, 2008 / 5:40 p.m.

The Acting Speaker Royal Galipeau

The question is on the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

Judges ActGovernment Orders

April 14th, 2008 / 5:40 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Judges ActGovernment Orders

April 14th, 2008 / 5:40 p.m.

The Acting Speaker Royal Galipeau

(Motion agreed to, bill read the third time and passed)