Bill C-231

An Act to amend the Youth Criminal Justice Act

This enactment amends the Youth Criminal Justice Act in order to
(a) clarify the measures governing problematic substance use treatment programs for young persons;
(b) enable, in some cases, the youth justice court that finds a young person guilty of an offence to delay sentencing to enable the young person to participate in a problematic substance use treatment program or any other treatment program;
(c) enable the youth justice court to include in certain orders the condition of attending a problematic substance use treatment program or any other treatment program; and
(d) provide that the youth justice court may include in an order for conditional supervision a condition that the young person attend a problematic substance use treatment program or any other treatment program.

Youth Criminal Justice Act

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L’Érable—Lotbinière, QC]

moved that the bill be now read the third time and passed.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleagues.

It is always emotional to rise in the House to introduce a private member's bill. In 11 years, this is the first time I have had the opportunity to introduce a bill. It is a special occasion because there are so many of us in the House and so few of us get a chance to present our bills.

I was given this opportunity at a rather special time in my life, when I really wanted to do something. Life has given me a reason to bring forward a private member's bill that affects so many people, especially young people. That is why, last year, my wife Caro, my entire family and I thought about how we could use this opportunity to make a difference.

This opportunity surfaced following discussions with officers at the Library of Parliament, who gave us their unwavering support from the outset, along with the law clerks of the House, about introducing a bill to help young people. That was the genesis of the friends of David bill, Bill C-231. As I said earlier, I am speaking on my own behalf, but also on behalf of my son David, who is no longer with us, my wife Caro, my daughters Marie-Soleil and Justine, and our big, beautiful family, who are supporting me with this bill. I would even go so far as to say that they are supporting me and all members of this House with this bill.

I want to remind the House that the main purpose of Bill C-231, the friends of David bill, is to help young people struggling with drug addictions or mental health-related consequences. This aspect is a bit new, and I will talk about it more later on. The bill was amended in committee, and we just adopted a new version. I will come back to that a little later.

Bill C‑231 comes into play when young people appear before the courts for offences committed as a result of their addiction. Since the cases involve minors, justice system actors, whether they are police officers, prosecutors or judges, should have the ability to refer them to a treatment centre rather than punishing them immediately, as would occur in all other circumstances. The objective is to help rather than punish, at a moment when the actions of adults can still have a meaningful influence on these young people's lives. That is the purpose of Bill C‑231.

I would also like to thank all my colleagues in the House. That is precisely what all members chose to do on April 15: They chose to try to influence young people, while there is still time to intervene, by voting unanimously in favour of Bill C‑231. A total of 327 members voted for its passage. No one opposed it. As for the members who were absent, they were “paired”, in parliamentary terminology, and therefore could not vote that day. Many of them nevertheless expressed their support to me afterward. Had they been able to cast a vote, they too would have voted in favour of the bill.

Many people have already had the opportunity to see it, but not everyone has. I want everyone to know exactly what this bill will change: the youth criminal justice system. The bill sets out three main points. I think it is worth reading them this evening so that we all understand what this bill seeks to change, how we can help young people more and how we can ensure that they end up with a system that will help them to get back on the path to a better life rather than going down one that will lead them nowhere and that may cause them many problems throughout their life.

The bill will, and I quote:

(b) enable, in some cases, the youth justice court that finds a young person guilty of an offence to delay sentencing to enable the young person to participate in a problematic substance use treatment program or any other treatment program;

We are talking about drugs. I will come back to that a bit later.

It will also, and I quote:

(c) enable the youth justice court to include in certain orders the condition of attending a problematic substance use treatment program or any other treatment program; and (d) provide that the youth justice court may include in an order for conditional supervision a condition that the young person attend a problematic substance use treatment program or any other treatment program.

This could even allow a judge to require a young person to undergo treatment. As we know, when a young person is in that kind of situation, they will not always agree to participate in a treatment program. What we especially wanted to avoid was having a young person punished simply because they refused treatment. The bill specifically states that a refusal to participate in treatment cannot be held against the young person. Someone who attends a treatment program against their will is unlikely to benefit much from it. However, the bill would still allow a judge to tell the young person that they are being given an opportunity to participate and that, if they do so, the judge will not sentence them immediately. If things go well and the young person comes to understand the path they are on, they may be able to turn their life around more easily. Above all, it will give them a better start as they enter adulthood.

Those who have been following my speeches from the beginning will notice that the bill has evolved somewhat. I would like to thank Minister of Justice, the staffers from his office, and officials from the Department of Justice, who suggested significant improvements to the bill when the committee was considering it.

Now, orders will not be limited to just problematic substance use treatment programs. They could also apply to any other type of treatment program.

I would never have dared go that far when I introduced my bill. I told myself that if we wanted to have the support of as many people as possible in the House and if we wanted to be able to truly change the lives of young people, we should really focus on a specific target, to keep people from challenging it or saying that it made no sense.

The House gave unanimous support. When I saw the government's proposals, asking why this should not be extended to other forms of treatment, like for mental health issues, I thought it was an excellent idea. We would have even liked it to be much broader than that. That said, this will now allow even more young people to be able to access this unique opportunity to get help rather than being punished by the justice system if they commit a first offence, if they have a first conviction for problematic substance use or drug use.

This is excellent news for young people who are struggling, perhaps without knowing the cause or even being aware of it, but whose struggles may have been noticed by those around them or by judges, prosecutors or police officers. These measures will enable them to become aware of the issue and perhaps help them overcome it without having to go through all the negative consequences that such problems can entail.

By broadening the scope of Bill C-231, as we did in committee thanks to the support of all members, we are ensuring that no young person will be left behind. I think this is great news. We will be able to help even more people.

In a moment, I will speak about the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights, but first I would like to thank every member of that committee for unanimously supporting the friends of David bill, as well as all the amendments that were proposed.

Things got quite emotional in committee. We heard testimony from people from the office, but we also heard from members of my family. I learned things from some of my family members, things that we had not really talked about before. It was quite emotional. Being in front of an audience, talking about personal matters and learning things from my daughter was such a special moment. I learned some things from my colleagues as well. Some of my colleagues shared things that really moved me. I will share some of them.

My wife reminded us that we have to stay united in our efforts to help young Canadians. She told the committee something that really stuck with me: “Inaction has serious consequences, profound and irreversible consequences. In our family, those consequences have a story, a face and a name, David.” That is why it is called the friends of David bill.

My daughter Justine surprised me. She said a lot, but there is one thing she said that I wanted to read this evening to show how important it is that we act quickly. She said, “The more time goes by, the more substance use takes hold, and the more substance use takes hold, the harder it is to overcome.”

Put that way, it sounds simple. Put that way, it sounds logical. However, when those words are said by my daughter, who lived with us and experienced those moments with David for a long time, who was both a witness and sometimes even a victim of the consequences of his decisions, it tells me that we are on the right track. What we want to do is, in fact, act more quickly. What we want to do is give young people a way to avoid going through that, as long as they realize it, of course. That is what the bill seeks to do: empower young people to realize what they are going through.

Angy Riendeau is a criminologist who came to testify, at my request, and who set the record straight. In parliamentary committee, we are used to hearing from witnesses who come to say the same things as us, but Angy came to tell us the truth. I will quote her so that I get the words right. She set the record straight by pointing out that legislative changes cannot have the intended effects if the resources are unavailable. She said:

We can add as many provisions as we like to a law, but if the resources aren't there, if specialized assessments aren't accessible, if families are left on their own for months, and if community stakeholders don't feel supported to intervene quickly, our mission today will not be achieved.

She even emphasized how important it is for parents to act at the first sign because, “at the first warning sign, a young person can truly access specialized assessment, concrete resources and adults capable of supporting them before the situation deteriorates”. When warning signs appear, people are available to help young folks, provided the resources are in place. Finally, Angy Riendeau, whom I thank for her participation, summed up what can truly change the course of a young person's life: “Beyond legislation, a rapid response, the quality of human connection and real access to services are often what alter a trajectory”.

She used to be a police officer and has now decided to devote her life to helping young people. I am very grateful to her for coming to tell us this, because up here in Parliament, we think we are doing a good job and that we have solutions for everything, but if the necessary resources are not actually provided on the ground, what we do here will not make any difference at all in the lives of young people. This is something my wife and I, along with anyone else who would like to help us in this effort, want to continue working on.

My Bloc Québécois colleague from Rivière-du-Nord said, “I won't speak for everyone around the table, but I think we're practically all in agreement on the bill introduced by our colleague”. He went on to say:

As a parent, I have always asked myself the following questions about my children: If I am too strict, will they run away, and if I am not strict enough, will they become delinquents? It's true that we don't know. No one has a crystal ball. I, too...would have liked to have someone like Ms. Riendeau with me.

This shows how difficult it can be for parents to understand what is happening with their kids. Rhéal showed that. I am sorry, I should have said the member for Rivière-du-Nord. I thank my colleague because this is, indeed, a reality parents face, and we have been through it often.

There were also some touching personal stories, like the story told by a Conservative member. I will not name him, because I did not ask his permission and because I do not necessarily want to tell his story, but he himself nearly took his own life 16 years ago and has known people who have struggled with addiction. He said in committee, “Some overcame these challenges, and others did not”, adding, “I believe that your work on this bill and your willingness to speak about the tragedy your family experienced will save lives”. He also said, “Justice and compassion both play a key role in our efforts and work”.

The fact that this person had the courage to come and tell us this in a committee meeting—and that he is one of my colleagues—well, that was touching, and that is indeed the message we want to convey. My colleagues in the Liberal Party also emphasized how important it is to take action to help young people.

Once my wife Caro and I decided to go public about our personal lives by tabling the friends of David bill, we found out that we are not the only ones who have gone through a tragedy like this, and we realized how many other families go through similar experiences. That is exactly why we must act now. I encourage members to take a look at the many comments made on social media after the bill was first tabled.

People opened their hearts and shared some touching stories. If these people got a chance to express themselves and perhaps these young people got to experience something different because we dared to talk about it and the members dared to support my bill, the friends of David bill, I think we will have done something good.

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

Mr. Speaker, as I have indicated to the member across the way, I applaud him and give him a tremendous amount of credit for having the courage to present his personal family situation. It takes a great deal of courage to do so. I think it is a great tribute to David, quite frankly, in recognizing that all lives do matter.

I want to go back to the issue of the principle, because I think that is critically important here. This can happen to anyone. Young people can cross a road, and it can be very difficult as a direct result. This why it is important that, as legislators, we take that into consideration when we talk about the Criminal Code or budgetary measures.

Could the member provide his thoughts on that?

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L’Érable—Lotbinière, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I will try to answer in English. This bill could change the lives of a lot of kids and young people in this country. By principle, I think all of us are here to make life better for every Canadian. We do not always agree on the way to do it, but on this particular file, I am really proud that everyone is supporting the fact that we have a role to play. We can help if we just change some little words in the legislative agenda or in bills. Yes, I think we will act on principle to help people if we put partisanship aside and do something really good for our young people.

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

Mr. Speaker, this bill, and the story and circumstances surrounding it, are moving. There is something special about it. My colleague is right to point that out. It is not often that everyone in this House can agree on something. It does happen, though not often enough for my liking, that we are all able to agree on doing what needs to be done for the benefit of the community as a whole.

I will, of course, be giving a speech shortly. Unfortunately, it will probably be to repeat what I have already said. For now, however, I would like to ask my colleague a question. In his opinion, is this something that could happen again, at least in the coming weeks? Could we all set aside considerations that are sometimes a little too partisan and work together to do what is best for all our communities across Quebec and across Canada?

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L’Érable—Lotbinière, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for his contribution in committee. I want him to know that the sooner we get to work, the sooner we will be able to really change things.

However, things are already going well, because everyone in the House agrees that we should pass the bill quickly. Everyone in the House agrees with the principle. The bill has to go to the other place now. I hope our friends at the other place will move as quickly as we are. I wish we could be unanimous and take a Kumbaya approach to all bills. Unfortunately, that is not possible.

There are certain situations where we are able to do the right thing together, and I think this example illustrates that well. I am glad we can do this for David's friends.

[Kelly DeRidder, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, there seems to be a consensus. Everybody is onside with this passing the final stage, which is remarkable to hear.

What I would like to do is just give my colleague a moment to say a few words about David so it is in Hansard forever.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L’Érable—Lotbinière, QC]

How much time do I have, Mr. Speaker?

I just read some comments on my social media, and everybody said that David was very polite. He was a good worker. He was respectful of everyone. He was the one who always took the time to give us a hug, me and his mother. He was a guy who was always taking care of his sisters. He was kind of a brilliant man. He had a great future until he met this bad friend. This bad friend just changed him, not his heart, because he was always that kind of guy, a polite, respectful hugger, but his mind was obsessed by drugs, and that changed him.

I want the House to know that just a few years before, we had been talking about this. He had a great period of time. He had two children. We were talking about how we could help others who were facing his problem. We were supposed to do it together. We were supposed to do some speeches, some keynotes, together to help other children at a young age not to follow this road. I will do it alone, or not really alone but with my wife and my daughters, in his memory and to help others to not use those substances, which can really break the lives of a lot of people.

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

Mr. Speaker, I must say to my friend that he was very inspirational in the manner he presented the debate, not only today but even at second reading. He has been exceptionally respectful and very reflective of what has taken place and of the motivation that is there. It is appropriate to share it with his wife because of the impact it has on the family unit. One can have a great deal of sympathy for it. It is another thing to have empathy when living through it. I do applaud him, as I indicated in my question, for having the courage to share this in such a public way. It is a wonderful tribute to David, who had a wonderful life. I wanted to say that to my friend at the outset.

I talk about the principle of the legislation because I think there is a great deal of sympathy from a vast majority of people when we talk about young people. We all recognize that being a young person today can be a challenge. It is a much different society we live in today and over the last decade than we had when I was growing up, whether regarding the availability of drugs, addictions issues or the Internet and the impact it is having on individuals and socializing. There are a great deal of bad characters in society; there always have been, but think of the degree to which they have become accessible. This is not a partisan issue. We need to have initiatives like this that give us a bit of a wake-up call as a collective of parliamentarians at both the federal level and the provincial level.

One of the presenters commented on resources. We can pass wonderful laws, but if we do not have the resources and the will at different levels, we will not be anywhere near as successful as we could potentially be. I look to the provinces, because many of the courts, for example, are provincial courts. The role that law enforcement officers play is absolutely critical. There are the communities and stakeholders. Often, many of the stakeholders have outreach programs that try to keep in touch with the individuals who are feeling challenged with a wide spectrum of addictions. It is very real and very tangible. I suspect the bill will pass, hopefully very quickly out of the Senate chamber, because it is a good thing for the Parliament of Canada, both houses, to send this very strong message in a relatively short period of time through a strong, powerful, personal story and articulation on an issue that can have a positive outcome for not hundreds but thousands of young people.

If we were to canvass parents as a whole, we would hear that every parent thinks about the raising of their child and the direction they are going to go in. We all hope they will make good decisions. Quite often, unfortunately, it is others who get involved in a certain life who get someone going in the wrong direction, or they get too deep, as the member's daughter referred to. The deeper they get, the more difficult the challenge is.

My experience comes in two forms. One is as a concerned parent and the other is because of a role I played when I was in the Manitoba legislature. There are a lot of hard, tough feelings with regard to young people who fall on the wrong side.

What I did was get engaged with a youth justice committee. It provided a young person who made a mistake with the opportunity to go before a quasi-judicial group, a justice committee, where we would sit, listen and then come up with a disposition. If that young person fulfilled the disposition, there was no need for them to go to court and there was no criminal record, so if they wanted to go down to the States, for example, they could do that. It gave that young person a chance.

When I look at what the member is proposing in Bill C-231, I see a lot of similarities. When I reflect on the years I spent on that justice committee, I know there is a great deal of support for a system that recognizes that at times we need a discretionary authority to do something good by giving someone a break. Providing youth justice courts, in whatever form they might be, and that leadership coming from the Parliament of Canada I believe sends a very powerful message. Hopefully we will see provincial legislatures look at what has been happening. I suspect provincial parliamentarians will take an interest. My daughter is an MLA. I will pass the idea of what is being talked about this evening on to her, and I suspect there will be other parliamentarians at the provincial level.

When we look at the amendment brought forward that factors in mental health issues, we need to put more supports into the issue of mental health and well-being. We need to see more resources, and outcomes too, I must say, that deal with the issue of addictions. We can think of the damage it causes to the individual versus the family unit or the community from a social perspective. There is also a significant economic cost. I believe all of this makes a very strong argument that governments and stakeholders need to do a better job. When we are provided the opportunity through, in this case, our court system, I think we should take advantage of that. I hope that the judges, prosecutors and even defence lawyers out there will listen to the type of support the member opposite has generated.

As the member pointed out, no one voted against the legislation. Three hundred-plus members of Parliament voted in favour of it. Some of those who did not vote in favour of it approached the member opposite. It then went to the committee stage, where, because of the manner in which it is being presented, the support being brought forward and the co-operation within the department, it was ultimately made into better legislation, as the member himself indicated, by incorporating mental health.

First and foremost, I thank the member, his wife and his daughter for their contributions to making our communities better by bringing forward the legislation. I would also give thanks to anyone who was involved in making it to this stage. I look forward to it getting royal assent, before Christmas I trust.

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am probably going to repeat some of the things I said in the spring. The reality of legislative life is that we come back to the same bill, work on it and approve it again.

As my colleague said earlier, I already spoke to this bill in committee, as well as in the House at second reading. I will now speak to it at third reading. I look forward to passing it. I think we all want it to be passed quickly, but David deserves for us to pass it quickly.

Drug addictions are not a legal issue. These are medical issues, especially when it comes to our teenagers. Of course, drug addictions are not fun. We would not wish for anyone to have to deal with addictions of this nature, neither colleagues of the same age or the same generation, nor our parents or children. Drug use is bad. Drug trafficking must be stopped.

It is vital to combat it in every way possible. This is being done. There are always attempts to balance more restrictive measures with preventative, corrective and rehabilitative measures. It is not always easy. Colleagues from different parties often have heated arguments and fierce debates on these issues.

When it comes to our teenagers, I am pleased to see that we are all on the same page, even members from other parties who generally tend to disagree with our point of view. As members know, rehabilitation is part of the Bloc Québécois's DNA. We are perhaps a little too naive. Likely so. Perhaps we would be better off being less naive. It all depends on one's point of view, but we believe in rehabilitation.

The society that we want to build, the one that we want to live in and that we want our children to live in, is a caring society. We want it to be a society that we will be happy to live in and that will accept us despite our shortcomings, our mistakes, our faults and our flaws, a society that will help us to get back on the straight and narrow, help us to see the light and help us to better understand what is best for us and for the rest of society. The Bloc Québécois adopted this way of thinking and this way of doing things a long time ago, when the party was founded and possibly even well before that. I cannot speak for members of other parliaments, but I would be surprised if Quebec thought differently. I believe that, historically, in Quebec, we have always favoured rehabilitation over punishment.

There must be punishment. I am not saying that we do not need any. We must take firm action. We need to be fair, equitable and rigorous in how we treat our young people in particular. They need limits. They need guidelines to determine what is right and wrong. Often, even sometimes as parents, we are amazed at the impact or influence we can have on them because they do not show us and they will not tell us. However, in the long term, we find out that they have learned something from what we have been able to tell them in the past, and that is great.

Yes, we believe in interventions, including those of a criminal nature, but above all, we believe in rehabilitation. We need to help people understand, those around us who have strayed—I do not like to use the expression “strayed” because I myself tend to stray from time to time—or those who have bent the societal rules that we have set for ourselves and who try to do things differently. We need to help them see things clearly.

Addiction is a serious problem that must be addressed, but when it comes to teenagers in particular, we need to focus on rehabilitation and recovery. It really needs to be viewed as a dependence issue, a health problem, rather than a criminal problem.

I was listening to my colleague on the government side earlier, and I agreed with him. I was even pleased to hear him say the following. I will quote him word for word, because I wrote it down.

The words I wrote down are these: “to give someone a break.”

However, I think he should have said:

“to give society a break.” It is not just “someone”.

These young folks who have strayed from the straight and narrow, who have taken drugs, who have struggled with addiction, and who are having a hard time turning things around would possibly, if not probably, make valuable contributions to society under different circumstances. Our society needs them. We need people like David today. He could have become an incredible social worker, maybe a lawyer or a member of Parliament. Who knows? He could have made a contribution to our society. We need David and other young people in the same situation.

When someone gets a second chance, society as a whole gets a second chance. Society can then benefit from the important contributions these young folks can make. To me, that is important. It is our duty as parliamentarians to fix what needs to be fixed, but to do so in the right way, by investing in our future.

Earlier, I asked my colleague from Mégantic—L'Érable—Lotbinière a question. I asked him if it were possible, if we could imagine a scenario where all members of the House, regardless of their party, could also agree, under different circumstances, on meaningful bills. These bills might not be perfect, and we might want to make some changes to them, but we could still agree to pass them quickly. I am not talking about rushing to adopt them by saying that it is in the national interest and that they will take effect as early as next week. That is a different matter. We will discuss that another time. Rather, I am talking about reaching an agreement to adopt them in a reasonable manner.

In my opinion, there are too many bills that get carried over from one Parliament to the next. It is counterproductive. The amount of money, time and effort that is needlessly invested in bills that never come to fruition is unbelievable, and I would say incalculable. I have not even tried to calculate it. It disappoints me. I am disappointed all the time.

As for David's bill, which we are considering today, it gives me confidence in the humanity of my colleagues in this House, and that is something I truly appreciate. I want to say this not only to our colleague from Mégantic—L'Érable—Lotbinière, but to all members of the House: When a bill is worthwhile, even if it is not perfect, can we make a greater effort to discuss it before it reaches committee and comes to a vote? Can we work together to find ways to move it forward? Can we ensure that when a bill is introduced, it is passed, if not within a few months, then at least within a year? That is my hope, and though it may be somewhat naive, I hope my colleagues will allow me the occasional moment of naivety. I would love to see bills like this advance more quickly.

Let me close by returning to what I said earlier about David's law. I will share what I have learned from all this and from the handful of years I have spent on this earth. I do not consider myself old; I often say that no one is truly old until they reach three digits. Even so, I have gained a bit of life experience. I would say that our young people need love, not prison bars.

[Kelly DeRidder, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I want to start today by asking everyone in this room to think of a teenager in their life. It could be their son, daughter, grandchild, niece, nephew or even a neighbour. Imagine that teenager is going through a rough patch. They got caught up in substance abuse or addiction, which is something that happens in all our communities day in and day out. Now imagine that the rough patch leads them to make a mistake. They commit a petty crime or make a poor decision that brings them into contact with our justice system.

What do members want to happen to the teenager in that moment? Do they want them to be locked away in a cell, surrounded by influence, where their addiction could continue, or do they want them to recover, to get into counselling and get the help they need to turn their life around? I think most of us would choose care. We would choose to give that young person a second chance at a different life, which is a choice that brings us here today to Bill C-231.

Bill C-231 is about updating the laws we have around youth justice to focus on health, recovery and healing. The first big change it would bring is to create a path to recovery for a young person who broke the law, instead of sending them straight to jail. It would give them that second chance to get clean, get healthy and rebuild their life before a continued life of addiction truly takes hold.

I think that second chance is something we can all understand. None of us would ever want our worst decision at 17 years old to dictate the rest of our life. We understand that a young person can change, because we have seen it. We have seen young people graduate, get jobs, rebuild relationships with their families and become leaders in their community. The question is whether our justice system is going to help them make that possible or whether it will make that journey even harder.

We all know that recovery is not a straight line. It is a climb. Sometimes we stumble, and that is okay, as long as we get ourselves back up again. This bill would make sure that if a young person stumbles on their first try, the judge cannot throw them back into prison for failing treatment. Why is this important? It is because fear cannot shut down recovery. If a teenager thinks that admitting they have slipped up will land them in jail, they will likely hide their struggles, lie to those around them or even run away. By removing that threat of time in prison, we would give them a safe environment to keep trying until recovery sticks.

To understand why this change is necessary, we have to take a look at how our system works today. For a long time, our system has operated like a hammer: If a person breaks a rule, the hammer comes down. However, addiction is not something we can hammer away. We cannot punish trauma, or dependence on a substance, out of a human being.

When we lock up a young person who is addicted to drugs or alcohol, two things usually happen. First, they will not get access to recovery and the care they need to beat the addiction. Second, they are isolated from their family. We remove them from their school or learning program and connect them with deeper criminal behaviours. When they eventually get released, often as young adults, their addiction is still there, but now they have lost their support system, or it is broken, and their future opportunities are limited.

Creating a cycle where people reoffend time after time does not make our community safer. This is where I believe we need to think beyond punishment with respect to addiction. We need to start thinking about outcomes, and at the end of the day, the goal in our justice system should not be simply to punish someone but to create a path to breaking cycles and building a different life.

We have to ask ourselves what a true, safe community looks like. Is the neighbourhood safer when a young person is locked away for six months, only to come back angrier, more disconnected and still addicted, or is the neighbourhood safer when that same teenager is guided through healing and education, and can build a stable life and become a happy, healed, productive neighbour?

Bill C-231 would step into that cycle and break it at the beginning. It recognizes that teenagers' brains are still developing. Their decision-making skills are still being formed. Teenagers are wired to make mistakes, test boundaries and sometimes fall into bad situations, but their brains are remarkably adaptable. At that age, with the right structure, the right rehabilitation plan and proper guidance, a young person can turn their entire life around before adulthood.

This is why early intervention is so incredibly important. The earlier we can interrupt addiction, the earlier we can reconnect young people with their family, with education and with their community. This is not about letting people off the hook or ignoring accountability. Recovery is hard work. One has to show up every day, take accountability for one's past and do the heavy emotional lifting it takes to heal and become truly addiction-free. This is real accountability. It requires far more effort and leads to far better results than just sitting in a jail cell.

Think about what this means for families. When a young person falls into addiction, it is not their personal crisis. It pulls in their entire family. Parents spend sleepless nights worrying about their child, whether they will come home and whether they are still alive. They look for treatment beds, navigate confusing and expensive health care systems and try desperately to keep their children safe. When legal trouble hits, many parents feel isolated, as if they have hit a dead end. They fear that the court will take their child away and lock them up, leaving the underlying issue untreated.

Bill C-231 offers families hope. It would turn the feeling of being stuck into a doorway for help. It would allow everyone to work together to guide our young people back on the right track. It says to parents that their child has made a mistake but that we are going to focus on getting them well so they can rebuild their future. That future matters.

If we help even one young person recover, we are helping not only that individual but also their parents, their siblings, their classmates, their future co-workers and even the communities that they will eventually be a part of. Every young person we help get back on their feet is one more person who has the opportunity to contribute instead of being trapped in a cycle of addiction and the justice system.

To wrap things up, I want to leave us with one simple thought. A society should not be judged by how strictly it punishes its young people when they fail. It should be judged by how effectively we help them stand back up. Bill C-231 is practical, compassionate and a necessary update to our youth justice system. It would choose rehabilitation, and, most importantly, it would give young people who have lost their way a realistic path toward recovery.

We all want safer communities. We all want our young people to grow up healthy and educated and to have a wonderful life that they build on their own. Bill C-231 would give us the ability to make that a reality. In the name, memory and honour of David, I look forward to the bill's passing the final stage.

[Juanita Nathan, Liberal, Pickering—Brooklin, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today at the third reading to speak in support of the private member's bill, Bill C-231, a bill that has benefited from thoughtful consideration and study at the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights. I am proud to speak in support of Bill C-231, which proposes specific amendments to the Youth Criminal Justice Act, YCJA.

Bill C-231 proposes to amend the YCJA to help youth with substance use disorders who come in contact with the criminal justice system to access treatment programs that will assist them in meaningfully rehabilitating and reintegrating into their community. More specifically, the bill proposes to clarify the instances when a young person in contact with the youth criminal justice system can be referred or ordered to participate in a treatment program and to enable, in certain cases, a youth justice court to defer sentencing to allow the young person to participate in a treatment program. In addition, the bill proposes to amend the YCJA to enable the youth justice court to include, in certain orders, the condition of attending a treatment program.

The objectives of this bill align well with the objectives of the YCJA and the overall youth criminal justice system. The preamble to the YCJA calls on communities, families, parents and others concerned with the development of young persons to be active participants in the youth criminal justice system. The YCJA invites their involvement to prevent youth crime by addressing its underlying causes, to respond to the needs of young persons, and to provide guidance and support to those at risk of committing crimes.

Bill C-231 enhances the YCJA's multipronged approach to problematic substance use and seeks to improve outcomes for young people with substance use disorders who come in contact with the criminal justice system.

At second reading of the bill, some members shared personal stories, as well as stories from constituents in their ridings. These stories remind us that problematic substance use and mental health issues affect all of us, whether directly or directly.

These heartfelt and informative discussions continued during the committee's study of Bill C-231. I want to thank committee members for their interest and active participation during the study of Bill C-231. Their candid and at times personal interventions helped nourish the committee's discussions regarding potential amendments. I want to thank the witnesses who came forward and shared touching stories as well as insightful views on topics related to problematic substance use.

We had the privilege to hear from family members of the member for Mégantic—L'Érable—Lotbinière, who tragically lost his son, David last year. We heard from Caroline Levesque, who is David's mother and an early childhood educator, and Justine Berthold, who is David's younger sister and a nurse.

During their testimony, they mentioned that too often the youth criminal justice system focuses on offences and punishments without looking into the underlying cause of a young person's offending behaviour. They spoke about the importance for the youth criminal justice system of having the right tools and said that enabling decision-makers to use these tools at the right time would improve the YCJA's ability to support meaningful rehabilitation and reintegration.

The committee also heard from Angy Riendeau, a criminologist who highlighted the importance of early interventions when it came to preventing and addressing the risk factors that can eventually lead to persistent criminality in adulthood. She noted that the amendments in Bill C-231 would add to the intervention mechanisms already available under the YCJA to better help young people access treatment, specialized assessments, care and appropriate resources in a timely manner.

The amendments that were made during the clause-by-clause study of Bill C-231 are consistent with the views that were shared during the witness testimonies. All the amendments proposed were adopted unanimously by committee members. This showcases the close co-operation that this bill has cultivated among members.

To further the bill's objective of improving the YCJA's public health approaches to problematic substance use, many of the amendments that were made to Bill C-231 at committee relate to the language used in the bill.

For example, the term “addiction” was replaced by “problematic substance use” to align with the more modern, less stigmatizing language used in the Controlled Drug and Substances Act. Certain clauses of the bill were also amended to refer to problematic substance use treatment programs or any other treatment programs. This is to avoid unintended interpretations that may restrict access to other types of treatment programs, including programs focused on mental health or on behaviour modification and skills development.

This broader terminology would also allow the YCJA to remain flexible and relevant, should types of treatment available to young people evolve over time.

Furthermore, multiple amendments were made to Bill C-231 at committee, seeking to clarify, and at times broaden, the instances where decision-makers under the YCJA can refer or order youth to participate in a treatment program. For example, a coordinating amendment was added to ensure that prosecutors, in addition to police officers, must consider whether it would be appropriate to refer a young person to a problematic substance use treatment program before starting or continuing judicial proceedings against the young person.

Moreover, amendments were made to clarify the situations when attendance at a problematic substance use treatment program or any other treatment program may be ordered as a sentence or as a condition to an order. For example, an amendment was made to explicitly mention that attendance at such treatment programs can be ordered as a condition of probation and continual supervision.

These amendments would ensure greater consistency in the YCJA sentencing framework when it comes to problematic substance use, especially in the context of the Canada overdose crisis and the toxic illegal drug supply. The federal government is committed to a comprehensive public health and safety approach that focuses on connecting people to vital services, destigmatization and supporting prevention, treatment and recovery.

In closing, I believe significant improvements were made to Bill C-231 during its clause-by-clause study and that it is ready for passing in the chamber. I urge all members to support it at third reading.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, John Nater]

The hon. member will have about two and a half minutes left, if she so chooses, the next time the House considers this matter.

The time provided for the consideration of Private Members' Business has now expired, and the order is dropped to the bottom of the order of precedence on the Order Paper.