An Act to amend the Criminal Code (disclosure of information by jurors)

Status

This bill has received Royal Assent and is, or will soon become, law.

Summary

This is from the published bill. The Library of Parliament has also written a full legislative summary of the bill.

This enactment amends the Criminal Code to provide that the prohibition against the disclosure of information relating to jury proceedings does not apply, in certain circumstances, in respect of disclosure by jurors to health care professionals.

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.

Votes

Sept. 28, 2022 Passed 3rd reading and adoption of Bill S-206, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (disclosure of information by jurors)
May 18, 2022 Passed 2nd reading of Bill S-206, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (disclosure of information by jurors)

Bill C-5—Time Allocation MotionCriminal CodeGovernment Orders

June 9th, 2022 / 11:20 a.m.


See context

The Assistant Deputy Speaker Carol Hughes

I just want to remind the member that he had an opportunity to ask the question and he should take the opportunity to listen to the response without interrupting.

It is my duty to interrupt the proceedings and put forthwith the question on the motion now before the House.

The question is on the motion.

If a member of a recognized party present in the House wishes to request a recorded division or that the motion be adopted on division, I would invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.

The hon. member for Lambton—Kent—Middlesex.

Bill C-5—Time Allocation MotionCriminal CodeGovernment Orders

June 9th, 2022 / 11:25 a.m.


See context

Conservative

Lianne Rood Conservative Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON

Madam Speaker, I request a recorded division.

Bill C-5—Time Allocation MotionCriminal CodeGovernment Orders

June 9th, 2022 / 11:25 a.m.


See context

The Assistant Deputy Speaker Carol Hughes

Call in the members.

And the bells having rung:

Bill C-5—Time Allocation MotionCriminal CodeGovernment Orders

June 9th, 2022 / 11:55 a.m.


See context

The Assistant Deputy Speaker Carol Hughes

The question is on the motion. Shall I dispense?

Bill C-5—Time Allocation MotionCriminal CodeGovernment Orders

June 9th, 2022 / 11:55 a.m.


See context

Some hon. members

Agreed.

No.

Bill C-5—Time Allocation MotionCriminal CodeGovernment Orders

June 9th, 2022 / 11:55 a.m.


See context

The Assistant Deputy Speaker Carol Hughes

[Chair read text of motion to House]

(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)

Vote #142

Criminal CodeGovernment Orders

June 9th, 2022 / 12:10 p.m.


See context

The Assistant Deputy Speaker Carol Hughes

I declare the motion carried.

The House resumed from June 1 consideration of Bill C-5, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, as reported (with amendment) from the committee, and of the motions in Group No. 1.

Report StageCriminal CodeGovernment Orders

June 9th, 2022 / 12:10 p.m.


See context

The Assistant Deputy Speaker Carol Hughes

I would like to remind members who are in the chamber that if they wish to have conversations, they should please take them out of the chamber so we can get to the orders of the day.

We will resume debate with the hon. member for Miramichi—Grand Lake.

Report StageCriminal CodeGovernment Orders

June 9th, 2022 / 12:10 p.m.


See context

Conservative

Jake Stewart Conservative Miramichi—Grand Lake, NB

Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to be here today and certainly, it is a pleasure to speak in the House of Commons. It is nice to see you again, as well.

I stand today to speak to the utter hypocrisy of the Liberal government and to shine a light on the utter disrespect for law-abiding Canadians and victims of crime. The government, with the prop-up support of the NDP, is attempting to push through Bill C-5, which would see the removal of mandatory minimum sentences for serious criminal offences in this country. Let me be clear on this. The Liberals are eliminating mandatory prison time for criminals who commit robbery with a firearm, weapons trafficking and drive-by shootings.

The Liberals' argument is that they are doing this because they feel these laws are unfair. I cannot make this up. What would the victims of these crimes consider unfair? I surely think they would feel that the person or persons who traumatized them through violent acts now being set free by the Liberal government is what is actually unfair.

Can members imagine being the victim of a drive-by shooting, losing a loved one or being robbed or held at gunpoint? Let us imagine this. These are the mandatory sentences that the government is trying to get rid of. The Liberals are more interested in standing up for criminals than actually defending our communities. The blatant hypocrisy is apparent with the fact that they willingly want to let gun crime perpetrators free sooner so that they can go out into our communities and wreak havoc again, and yet, they stand in righteous defence of enacting gun laws in this country that only serve to punish law-abiding citizens.

Let us look at some of the offences for which the Liberals feel the punishment is unfair. Bill C-5 would eliminate a number of mandatory minimums relating to gun crimes. Here they are: robbery with a firearm; extortion with a firearm; weapons trafficking; discharging a firearm with intent; using a firearm in commission of offences; and possession for the purpose of weapons trafficking.

When we hear the list out loud, as parliamentarians we must ask ourselves, is this seriously what the government wants for Canadians? Can a government seriously think that mandatory sentences are unfair for these types of crimes? We might ask ourselves if we are actually living in Canada or if any of this is real to begin with. Sadly, this is real and the members of this House have to stand and speak to this. Quite frankly, it is making our country unrecognizable.

The Liberal government believes the sentences are unfair. That is how it is putting it. The Liberals have no concern for the victims of these crimes. Their only concern is actually for the criminals who perpetrated the acts to begin with.

There are a few other examples of who the Liberal government feels are being mistreated by the justice system. The Liberals would eliminate six mandatory minimums in the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act that target drug dealers. Here they are: trafficking or possession for the purpose of trafficking; importing and exporting or possession for the purpose of exporting; production of a substance schedule I or II. Let me say that last one again: production of a substance schedule I or II. Examples here would be heroin, cocaine, fentanyl and crystal meth.

If I were not standing here as the member of Parliament for the great riding of Miramichi—Grand Lake and I was actually home in the community, maybe at Tim Hortons having a coffee, upon hearing this, I would think that it had to be wrong and there could be no way that any of this was true. What government could ever think that someone who produces a poison like crystal meth should be considered treated unfairly because they had to serve a mandatory sentence for their crime?

Crystal meth is pure poison. It is creating rot and decay in every community, including all across rural Canada. The problem is so vast in the region of Miramichi that the public is left scratching their heads on a good day. Law enforcement clearly does not have an answer for it at present. It is very complicated. This issue is really complicating life in Canada. How can we not give the people who produce it mandatory sentences? They are just going to keep doing it.

The members opposite who vote for this bill should be utterly ashamed when they go back to their home communities knowing the plague and rot of crystal meth abuse is rampant across the country. It would be in their backyards too, because it is everywhere in this country. The evil individuals who prey on their fellow man with the production of this drug should do every minute of time we can give them to keep them off our streets and hopefully keep them from enslaving more people with this highly addictive poison.

Canadians will have to try to mentally process how the government can feel that a meth producer is being treated unfairly. At the same time they also must process how the government feels about other criminals. Again, I want to say that as members of the opposition, we are obviously not supporting this. We want people who are going to produce these types of poison to be behind bars, because that is where they should be, and if you are going to commit crimes with weapons and firearms, then you need to have mandatory sentences as well.

Report StageCriminal CodeGovernment Orders

June 9th, 2022 / 12:15 p.m.


See context

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Alexandra Mendes

I will remind the hon. member that I have no intention of committing such crimes.

Questions and comments, the hon. member for Brantford—Brant

Report StageCriminal CodeGovernment Orders

June 9th, 2022 / 12:15 p.m.


See context

Conservative

Larry Brock Conservative Brantford—Brant, ON

Madam Speaker, my hon. colleague referenced Bill C-5 and how it would impact the trafficking of very serious drugs like fentanyl, carfentanil, cocaine and crystal meth. Bill C-5 would take away the mandatory minimum penalties, and it would also open up the possibility for conditional sentence considerations and house arrest.

Knowing what we know about drug traffickers plying their deadly trade in the comfort of their own homes, how do you feel the government's narrative with respect to community safety is now being compromised?

Report StageCriminal CodeGovernment Orders

June 9th, 2022 / 12:15 p.m.


See context

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Alexandra Mendes

To the hon. member, this is just a reminder that I do not have feelings in this debate.

The hon. member for Miramichi—Grand Lake.

Report StageCriminal CodeGovernment Orders

June 9th, 2022 / 12:15 p.m.


See context

Conservative

Jake Stewart Conservative Miramichi—Grand Lake, NB

Madam Speaker, that is really the crux of it.

The people who make this poison are not always the ones who go out and distribute it. If we are letting the people who make it sit at home on house arrest, we can guess what they are going to do. They are going to continue making it. Then they are going to continue finding new people to sell it. Then more and more Canadians are going to become addicted to things like fentanyl and crystal meth.

I think there is an ideological difference in what our sides of the floor are saying, but I ask why, in this country, we would be protecting criminals and the production of things like crystal meth. We have to put them in jail. that is where they belong.