Bill C-14

Bail and Sentencing Reform Act

An Act to amend the Criminal Code, the Youth Criminal Justice Act and the National Defence Act (bail and sentencing)

This enactment amends the Criminal Code to, among other things,
(a) provide direction to peace officers, justices and judges when they apply the principle of restraint;
(b) require a justice, before making a release order or a detention order in respect of an accused, to consider whether the accused is charged with an offence in the commission of which random and unprovoked violence was used or attempted;
(c) require a justice to impose a condition prohibiting the possession of a firearm or other weapon, and to consider imposing other conditions, when making a release order in respect of an accused charged with the offence of extortion or any offence involving a criminal organization;
(d) require a justice to consider imposing certain conditions when making a release order in respect of an accused charged with an offence of motor vehicle theft or with the offence of breaking and entering a dwelling-house;
(e) create a reverse onus provision for any accused charged with the offence of motor vehicle theft involving violence, motor vehicle theft for a criminal organization, extortion involving violence, breaking and entering a dwelling-house, certain offences related to trafficking in persons or human smuggling or certain offences in which an accused is alleged to have choked, suffocated or strangled a complainant;
(f) expand the reverse onus provision to any person charged with a serious offence involving violence and the use of a weapon who has been previously convicted, within 10 years, of a serious offence involving violence and the use of a weapon;
(g) add the number or gravity of any outstanding charges against an accused as circumstances that a justice is to consider in assessing whether the detention of the accused is necessary to maintain confidence in the administration of justice;
(h) expand the circumstances in which the release documents that an accused is subject to may be canceled;
(i) create a reverse onus provision for any person who has been found guilty of certain offences if the prosecutor applies to vacate that person’s interim release order;
(j) create new aggravating factors to address repeat violent offending, offences against first responders, retail theft and theft and mischief to property offences;
(k) add new consecutive sentence provisions for repeat violent offences, motor vehicle theft offences and breaking and entering offences, and extortion and arson offences;
(l) require courts to give primary consideration to denunciation and deterrence of repeat motor vehicle theft offences, repeat breaking and entering offences and organized crime offences;
(m) restrict the possibility of imposing conditional sentence orders for sexual assault, and offences of a sexual nature or committed for a sexual purpose that involves a victim under 18 years of age;
(n) restore the availability of driving prohibitions for the offences of manslaughter and criminal negligence causing bodily harm or death; and
(o) improve the administration of justice as it relates to sentencing by increasing the penalty for contempt, enhancing the fine enforcement regime and expanding the availability of remote appearances in the mental disorder regime.
It also amends the Youth Criminal Justice Act to, among other things,
(a) clarify the definition of “violent offence” to mean, among other things, an offence in the commission of which a young person causes bodily harm;
(b) provide that the time a young person is unlawfully at large does not count towards time served for a youth custody and supervision order;
(c) enable police officers to publish identifying information about a young person in urgent situations where there is an imminent danger to public safety;
(d) clarify the process for the detention and release of young persons who are remanded for an alleged breach of a condition of their youth custody sentence while awaiting a review by the youth justice court;
(e) set out a period of access for records of extrajudicial measures, other than extrajudicial sanctions, and clarify the rules for records of investigations kept by police that did not result in a charge or extrajudicial measures; and
(f) make several technical sentencing amendments.
It also amends the National Defence Act to, among other things,
(a) improve the administration of military justice as it relates to sentencing by increasing the penalty for contempt;
(b) require courts martial to give primary consideration to denunciation and deterrence of offences involving criminal organizations; and
(c) create new aggravating circumstances to address repeat violent offending, offences against first responders, stealing for commercial purposes and certain property offences.
Finally, the enactment also includes transitional provisions and coordinating amendments.

Bail and Sentencing Reform Act

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, back in April, Canada elected a new Prime Minister, who made a commitment to Canadians that we would bring forward substantial bail legislation. Bill C-14 has 80 targeted clauses to make substantial changes. The consultation included law enforcement agencies, provinces, municipalities and victims of crime. There were extensive consultations.

Our new Prime Minister has brought forward substantial bail legislation. If the Conservatives are prepared to see the legislation move forward, we could have this in law before the end of the year.

Does the member agree with me and the constituents I represent that passing bail reform legislation is of critical importance and that we should achieve to get it done before the end of the year?

[Branden Leslie, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

Madam Speaker, the easy question to ask is what took so long. The system has been broken for years.

Yes, there is a so-called new Prime Minister. The member was part of the old government that broke the system. I can assure him, having talked to victims and frontline police officers, that there have not been consultations for the last 10 years. They have been ignored.

This has been an academic exercise in trying to figure out the best way to stop crime, and it has failed. The soft-on-crime, revolving-door Liberal justice system is an admonishment of the approach the Liberals have taken. It is a complete failure. It is time that we listen to victims and frontline police officers and put criminals behind bars, where they belong.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Madam Speaker, I would like my colleague to tell us more about the impact that a bill like this one would have on the Oval Office, on Donald Trump.

Some things are taking a long time, but we have come under pressure from the Americans to take swift action. Do we feel as though we are taking too long? Should we bend even further to the will of the United States?

That is exactly what the Liberals told us that they would do. They said that they were going to sort everything out really quickly and that they would appease the U.S. In the end, that is not what is happening.

What does my colleague think would be the impact on the Oval Office?

[Branden Leslie, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

Madam Speaker, it is important to highlight the insane number of promises the so-called new Prime Minister of the lengthy, 10-year Liberal administration has made, how few he has kept and how few he possibly could keep.

The member mentioned my community. When Kellie died, it shook our community. My hometown has 13,000 people. Within hours, everybody knew, and then they heard what had actually happened. They were sad. They were heartbroken when Kellie died because she was such an important pillar of our community, but that sadness turned into sheer disgust knowing that her death was entirely preventable. If the Liberals had taken the bail system seriously over the last nine months or, more importantly, over the last 10 years, as we have seen a steady increase in crime rates across this country, she might still be with us. Her death did not need to happen.

It is so disappointing to have so many Liberal MPs stand up and forget that they defended the status quo that has caused so many tragedies to families like Kellie's and others right across this country.

[Vincent Ho, Conservative, Richmond Hill South, ON]

Madam Speaker, the Liberals are trying to pass their so-called bail and sentencing reform act today. However, as Canadians may recall, Conservatives tabled our jail not bail act just weeks ago. It is a piece of legislation that we thoughtfully and carefully drafted in consultation with police departments, victims groups and police associations to close all the Liberal loopholes. We worked all summer and did the homework for the Liberals, and they swiftly voted it down. The Liberals chose to keep repeat offenders on our streets and give house arrest to fentanyl traffickers, offenders of gun crime and sexual offenders. The Liberals are now tabling Bill C-14, which does not even meet us halfway.

Why do you think the Liberals are pretending to fix a problem that they caused?

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Alexandra Mendès), Alexandra Mendes]

I remind the hon. member that I do not think anything while I am in the chair.

The hon. member for Portage—Lisgar has 10 seconds.

[Branden Leslie, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

Madam Speaker, I suppose it is par for the course. The Liberals break it, promise they can fix it and fail. It is a vicious cycle.

Bill C-242 is a solution. The Liberals stole enough Conservative ideas in the last election. They should take this one, run with it and make this country a safer place.

[Jeff Kibble, Conservative, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

Madam Speaker, as always, it is my honour to rise in the House on behalf of the great people of Cowichan—Malahat—Langford on Vancouver Island.

I would like to take a minute to recognize Peyton Hammond, a 17-year-old who just won the World Darts Federation World Cup youth championship. Congratulations and well done. He certainly is a rising star.

Today, I would like to speak specifically about violent repeat offenders. Let us be clear. The Liberals' soft-on-crime Bill C-75 has allowed our towns and cities to become havens for violent repeat offenders. Frankly, Bill C-14 is not much better.

Let me take members to Duncan on Vancouver Island. It is a small town with a population of around 7,000. Lewis Street is the epicentre of violent repeat offenders, drug crimes and drug overdoses. There is an overdose prevention site, people are camping everywhere and there is struggling and suffering on the streets. It is one block from two schools. An elementary school and a middle school are one block away. I have been there many times. I have witnessed drug dealing and people overdosing, fighting and camping on the street. It is out of control. The park is a public toilet. There are no toilets; it is just a park. People are living on balconies. Residents there witness this every day.

“Stick Man” takes sticks every day and goes down the street, smashing cars. He gets arrested, is released the next day and does it again. I have seen him. The residents there have told me they have seen him doing it again and again. They witness it from their balconies and their front yards, or from behind their windows. They know the criminals. They see them again and again. They see public sexual acts and public indecency.

I am, and we are all, sympathetic to those suffering from homelessness and drug addiction. They, too, are victims of violent repeat offenders. These people are somebody's son, daughter, brother or sister. They have a family. They, too, suffer.

Seniors there are afraid to go out at night. They know who the violent repeat offenders are. They know who is going to attack them, day and night. Some of them are 90 years old. They are struggling to get property insurance because of where they live, because of the crime and because of the violent repeat offenders.

I would like to speak about Hank's Handimart, which is nearby. James Kim is a senior and a store owner. He was working in his store and was beaten nearly to death. He was put in hospital for several weeks, yet the next day, as his sons were covering shifts to keep the family business, which is helping the community, open and alive, they watched the accused walk past the store. The next day, he was out on bail.

The overall crime severity index there is 339 and the violent crime severity index is at 324. It is among the worst in British Columbia. The violent crime rate is 153% above the national average. That is not just in Duncan; it is in small and big towns and communities across Canada. People are suffering from Bill C-75 and the culture of violent repeat offenders and catch and release. Bill C-75 has failed Canada and it has failed Duncan. Is Bill C-14 any better?

Johnny was my daughter's boyfriend. He was murdered in downtown Victoria not three years ago. He was brutally stabbed to death. He was gutted with a hunting knife by a violent repeat offender who was out on bail. He had been charged multiple times. In fact, some of the charges were laid not two weeks earlier. They were violent crimes: attempted murder and attacking a police service dog. He should not have been out on bail, but he was. That is Bill C-75's failure. Will Bill C-14 solve it?

Last week, I asked the member for Etobicoke—Lakeshore, from the party opposite, if Bill C-14 would solve the issue of violent repeat offenders and if it would have saved Johnny. He said the problem was the judges. He questioned their training, how busy they were that day and their experience. He wanted to know their qualifications. He was pointing fingers and blaming our legal system for Bill C-75's failures. I think that was shameful. He then went on to challenge members who disagreed with him to take it outside.

Most importantly, the member was unable to answer, and did not answer, whether Bill C-14 would have saved the life of somebody like Johnny or the lives of so many other people across Canada who have been affected and whose lives have been shattered by violent repeat offenders. Violent repeat offences have spiked in the last 10 years.

Bill C-14 fails to impose automatic detention for those already on bail. This would have prevented Johnny's murder and so many other crimes. It leaves the principle of restraint in place, the very policy that forced the judges to release Johnny's murderer at the earliest opportunity under the least onerous conditions.

These are some of the examples specific to violent repeat offenders, which Bill C-14 fails to address. It fails to keep violent repeat offenders behind bars. It falls short. The principle of restraint remains. The “least onerous” language persists. It keeps the culture of release there.

House arrest limits do not go far enough for robbery, gun crimes and trafficking. The solution is clearly to bring the bill to committee and put in some hard work to fix Bill C-14. Sure, it copies some Conservative ideas, but not all of them. It certainly does not go far enough, as I outlined, specifically on the violent repeat offender problem. We need to keep these people where they belong, which is behind bars. What we have now is not working. Duncan knows it. Vancouver Island knows it. Towns across Canada know it. Victims know it. Law enforcement knows it.

Sure, Bill C-14 is a start. It also acknowledges that Bill C-75 was a failure. There is a lot of work needed to make some serious improvements to Bill C-14. We support getting it to committee in order to get it fixed and deliver good laws for Canadians with key elements like, for example, the principle of restraint, house arrest limits and restoring mandatory minimums. It needs to be responsive to the needs, requirements and advice of law enforcement officials and, indeed, all Canadians. The solution is, clearly, to work together, as a minority government should. It is not about saying, “We need to vote for their bill as it is, or we are the bad guy.” We need to be collaborative and work together for the betterment of Canadians, in order to keep people safe.

Bill C-14 needs lots of work. It needs fixing. It needs improvement. Conservatives are ready to work together to keep Canadians safe. I am wondering if the Liberals are ready to work together.

[Kristina Tesser Derksen, Liberal, Milton East—Halton Hills South, ON]

Madam Speaker, I know the member mentioned mandatory minimums. This has been brought up several times this morning. I am sure the member is aware that the Supreme Court struck down several cases based on mandatory minimums and their unconstitutionality. Our new bail and sentencing reform legislation would allow courts to use discretion in individual cases to ensure that criminals are properly punished without the risk of violating the charter.

Does the member understand the problem with mandatory minimums and their compliance with the charter, and will he support the reformative crime legislation the government has brought forward?

[Jeff Kibble, Conservative, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

Madam Speaker, as I said very clearly, we need to work together so we can solve the challenges, failures and shortcomings of Bill C-14. With collaborative work to fix it, we will work to support it.

As for mandatory minimums, judges need to be working on the particulars of the cases. They have their discretion, but they need to maintain those mandatory minimums.

[Mario Beaulieu, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

Madam Speaker, the Conservatives want tougher measures to fight crime. I would like to know their thoughts on the following ideas for cracking down on organized crime: creating a registry of criminal organizations and making it illegal to display symbols or insignia used by criminal organizations.

What does my colleague think about that?

[Jeff Kibble, Conservative, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

Madam Speaker, while I spoke specifically to violent repeat offenders and how Bill C-14 applies to them, I certainly agree that organized crime also needs to be addressed. That falls under my description of how the bill needs more work. Cracking down on organized crime would certainly be part of it.

[Fred Davies, Conservative, Niagara South, ON]

Madam Speaker, as members know, I have stood in this place many times over the last couple of months to talk about the brutal sexual assault and rape of a little girl in my riding of Niagara South, “Little E”. Everyone is keenly aware of this case. She was assaulted by a repeat offender, somebody who had just been released and who served one year of a year-and-a-half sentence. He attacked this little girl within weeks of his release.

I am wondering if my colleague can comment on how this legislation might have dealt with the release of this offender. Would it have happened under this legislation, and what improvements does he believe need to happen so that people like Daniel Senecal have a sentence that is commensurate with the crime?

[Jeff Kibble, Conservative, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

Madam Speaker, while I do not really know how to answer that question, it is an absolutely heartbreaking story. We need Bill C-14 to be worked on so cases like that simply cannot happen. It happens too often. That one example is too much, yet we know there are so many examples.

As Conservatives, our goal is to work together in committee to fix this bill so that Canadians like the ones in the story the member gave us are protected, and so that violent repeat offenders stay behind bars. We made suggestions already on how to fix it with our jail not bail act. Now is the time to work together and come up with a positive solution.

[Doug Eyolfson, Liberal, Winnipeg West, MB]

Madam Speaker, an article in last week's Winnipeg Free Press described how Manitoba has been underfunding its Crown attorneys. This has been happening in other provinces as well. We all know that, in order to be denied bail, someone needs a bail hearing, and there are not enough Crown attorneys for timely bail hearings. Under law, then, they have to be released.

Would you not agree that there is some responsibility among the provincial governments to make sure this is properly administered?